■ 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2008 


https://archive.org/details/historyofpeopleo01  rena 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL 


H ISTORY 


OF  THE 

People  of  Israel 

TILL  THE  TIME  OF  KING  DAVID 


ERNEST  RENAN 

\l 

AUTHOR  OF  “LIFE  OF  JESUS” 


VOL.  I. 


BOSTON 

ROBERTS  BROTHERS 


1896 


Presswork  by  John  Wilson  and  Son, 
University  Press. 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

PREFACE  vii 

Book  I. 

THE  BENI-ISRAEL  IN  THE  NOMAD  STATE  DOWN  TO 
THEIR  SETTLEMENT  IN  THE  LAND  OF  CANAAN. 

CHAPTER  I. 

Arrival  of  the  Semites  in  Syria. — Canaanites  ...  1 

CHAPTER  IL 

The  Nomad  Semites 11 

CHAPTER  III. 

Religious  Calling  of  the  Nomad  Semites  ....  22 

CHAPTER  IY. 

Monotheism,  Absence  of  Mythology 38 

CHAPTER  V. 

Ancient  Babylonian  Influence  ......  64 

CHAPTER  VL 

The  Name  of  Iahveh 69 


iv  CONTENTS. 

I 

CHAPTER  VII. 

The  Hebrew  or  Terachite  Group  . . • • = 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

The  Beni-Jacob,  or  Beni-Israel 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Religion  of  the  Beni-Israel 

CHAPTER  X. 

The  Beni-Israel  in  Egypt • 

CHAPTER  XL 

Influence  of  Egypt  upon  Israel 

CHAPTER  XII. 

Exodus  of  Israel 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

Israel  in  the  Desert  of  Pharan 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

Sinai  ...  

CHAPTER  XV. 

Journeying  towards  Canaan  ...... 


PAGE 

76 

88 

99 

113 

121 

131 

141 

157 

171 


CONTENTS. 


v 


Book  II, 

THE  BENT- ISRAEL  AS  FIXED  TRIBES,  FROM  THE  OCCU- 
PATION OF  THE  COUNTRY  OF  CANAAN  TO  THE  DE- 
FINITIVE ESTABLISHMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF 
DAVID.  

CHAPTER  I. 

PAGE 

The  Beni-Iseael  beyond  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Jordan  . 179 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  Conquest  op  the  Region  beyond  Jordan  . . . 188 

CHAPTER  III. 

Judah  and  Benjamin 200 

CHAPTER  IY. 

The  Conquest  op  Mount  Ephraim  and  the  North  . . 207 

CHAPTER  Y. 

Development  of  Materialist  Iahvehism  ....  218 
CHAPTER  VL 

The  Oracle  op  Iahveh 228 

CHAPTER  VIL 

The  Judges  241 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

Deborah 253 

CHAPTER  IX. 


First  Attempts  at  Royalty. — Gideon,  Abimelech 


259 


VI 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  X. 

Gileadite  Legends. — Jephthah 

CHAPTER  XL 

The  Danites. — Myth  of  Samson  ...... 

CHAPTER  XIL 

The  Civil  Wars  of  the  Tribes  ...... 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

Progress  of  the  Religious  and  Political  Organisation  of 
Samuel 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


Institution  of  Royalty 


CHAPTER  XV. 

Reign  of  Saul 


CHAPTER  XVL 

David’s  Early  Life. — Death  of  Saul  . 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

Ish-Bosheth  succeeds  Saul.— David  King  of  Hsbron 

CHAPTER  XVIIL 


PAOE 

273 


281 


289 


301 


314 


322 


331 


350 


David  King  of  Jerusalem 


357 


PREFACE. 


<« 

For  a philosophic  mind,  that  is  to  say  for  one  en- 
grossed in  the  origin  of  things,  there  are  not  more 
than  three  histories  of  real  interest  in  the  past  of 
humanity : Greek  history,  the  history  of  Israel,  and 
Boman  history.  These  three  histories  combined  con- 
stitute what  may  be  called  the  history  of  civilisation, 
civilisation  being  the  result  of  the  alternate  collabo- 
ration of  Greece,  Judea,  and  Borne.  Greece  in  my 
opinion  has  an  exceptional  past,  for  she  founded,  in 
the  fullest  sense  of  the  word,  rational  and  progressive 
humanism.  Our  science,  our  arts,  our  literature,  our 
philosophy,  our  moral  code,  our  political  code,  our 
strategy,  our  diplomacy,  our  maritime  and  interna- 
tional law,  are  of  Greek  origin.  The  framework  of 
human  culture  created  by  Greece  is  susceptible  of 
indefinite  enlargement,  but  it  is  complete  in  its  several 
parts.  Progress  will  consist  in  constantly  developing 
what  Greece  has  conceived,  in  executing  the  designs 
which  she  has,  so  to  speak,  traced  out  for  us. 

Greece  had  only  one  thing  wanting  in  the  circle  of 
her  moral  and  intellectual  activity,  but  this  was  an 
important  void  ; she  despised  the  humble  and  did  not 
feel  the  need  of  a just  God.  Her  philosophers,  while 

B 


V1U 


PREFACE. 


dreaming  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  were  tolerant 
towards  the  iniquities  of  this  world.  Her  religions 
were  merely  elegant  municipal  playthings ; the  idea 
of  a universal  religion  never  occurred  to  her.  The 
ardent  genius  of  a small  tribe  established  in  an  ob- 
scure corner  of  Syria  seemed  created  to  supply  this 
void  in  the  Hellenic  intellect.  Israel  never  stood 
quietly  by  to  see  the  world  so  badly  governed,  under 
the  authority  of  a God  reputed  to  be  just.  Her  sages 
burned  with  anger  over  the  abuses  of  the  world.  A 
bad  man,  dying  old,  rich,  and  at  ease,  kindled  their 
fury,  and  the  prophets  in  the  ninth  century  b.c. 
elevated  this  idea  to  the  height  of  a dogma.  The 
Israelitish  prophets  were  heated  declaimers,  such  as 
we  of  the  present  day  should  denounce  as  socialists  and 
anarchists.  They  were  fanatics  in  the  cause  of  social 
justice,  and  loudly  proclaimed  that  if  the  world  was 
not  just,  or  capable  of  becoming  so,  it  had  better  be 
destroyed — a view  which,  if  utterly  wrong,  was  very 
fertile  in  results,  for,  like  all  the  doctrines  of  despair, 
such  as  the  Russian  nihilism  of  the  present  day,  it  led 
^tto  deeds  of  heroism  and  brought  about  a grand 
awakening  of  the  forces  of  humanity.  The  founders 
of  Christianity,  who  were  the  direct  successors  of  the 
prophets,  spent  their  strength  in  an  incessant  call  for 
the  end  of  the  world,  and,  strange  to  say,  did  in  reality 
transform  the  world.  Through  Jesus,  the  apostles, 
and  the  second  generation  of  Christians,  there  was 
founded  a religion  evolved  from  Judaism,  which  three 
centuries  later  imposed  itself  upon  the  leading  races  of 


PREFACE. 


IX 


humanity,  and  took  the  place  of  the  petty  patriotic 
playthings  of  ancient  cities.  With  the  churches, 
which  were  merely  synagogues  opened  to  the  uncir- 
cumcised, was  born  an  idea  of  popular  association 
which  encroached  deeply  upon  the  democracy  of  the 
Greek  cities.  Christianity,  in  a word,  becomes  in 
history  as  important  an  element  as  the  liberal  ration- 
alism of  the  Greeks,  though  in  some  respects  less 
assured  of  perpetuity.  The  tendency  which  leads  the 
nineteenth  century  to  secularise  everything,  to  make 
a host  of  things  lay  instead  of  ecclesiastical,  is  a re- 
action against  Christianity;  but  even  supposing  that 
it  attains  its  end,  Christianity  will  leave  an  imperish- 
able trace  of  its  existence.  Liberalism  will  no  longer 
have  the  monopoly  of  the  government  of  the  world. 
England  and  America  will  long  preserve  the  vestiges 
of  Biblical  influence;  and  with  us  in  France,  the  social- 
ists— who  are,  unknown  to  themselves,  the  disciples 
of  the  prophets  — will  always  bring  the  practical 
politicians  to  terms. 

The  great  creations  of  Greece  and  Judea  would 
not  have  overcome  the  world  all  by  themselves. 
The  world,  to  make  it  ready  to  accept  Hellenism  and 
Christianity,  had  to  be  prepared  and  made  smooth, 
so  to  speak,  for  centuries  beforehand.  A great  human- 
itary  force  had  to  be  created,  — a force  powerful  enough 
to  beat  down  the  obstacles  which  local  patriotism 
offered  to  the  idealistic  propaganda  of  Greece  and 
Judea.  Rome  fulfilled  this  extraordinary  function. 
Her  prodigious  heroism  created  the  empire  of  force 


X 


PREFACE. 


in  the  world,  and  this  force  in  reality  served  to  pro- 
pagate the  work  of  Greece  and  the  work  of  Judea, 
that  is  to  say,  civilisation.  Force  is  not  a pleasant 
thing  to  contemplate,  and  the  recollections  of  Eome 
will  never  have  the  powerful  attraction  of  the  affairs 
of  Greece  and  of  Israel ; but  Eoman  history  is  none 
the  less  part  and  parcel  of  these  histories,  which  are 
the  pivot  of  all  the  rest,  and  which  we  may  call  pro- 
vidential, inasmuch  as  they  have  their  appointed 
place  on  a plan  which  is  elevated  above  the  chops 
and  changes  of  daily  life.  I say  providential,  not 
miraculous.  Everything,  in  the  progress  of  humanity, 
issues  from  one  single  principle,  at  once  natural  and 
ideal.  If  there  is  such  a thing  as  one  miraculous 
history,  there  are  at  least  three.  The  Jewish  history, 
which  claims  to  have  the  monopoly  of  miracles,  is  not 
a whit  more  extraordinary  than  Greek  history.  If 
supernatural  intervention  is  the  sole  explanation  of 
the  one,  so  it  must  he  of  the  other.  I will  even  add 
that,  in  my  opinion,  the  greatest  miracle  of  history 
is  Greece  herself.  The  simultaneous  apparition 
in  the  Greek  race  of  all  that  which  goes  to  compose 
the  honour  and  the  pride  of  the  human  intellect 
impresses  me  far  more  than  the  passage  of  the 
Eed  Sea  or  of  the  Jordan.  Happy  will  be  the  man 
who  shall,  at  the  age  of  sixty,  write  this  history  con 
amove , after  having  spent  his  whole  life  in  the 
study  of  the  works  which  so  many  learned  schools 
have  devoted  to  it.  He  will  have  for  his  recom- 
pense the  greatest  joy  -which  man  can  taste,  that  of 


PREFACE . 


si 


following  up  the  evolutions  of  life  in  the  very  centre 
of  the  divine  egg  within  which  life  first  began  to 
palpitate.  And  yet  does  it  follow  that,  because  I 
envy  the  future  historian  of  the  genius  of  Greece,  I 
regret  the  Nazarite’s  vow  wdiich  attached  me  early  in 
life  to  the  Jewish  and  Christian  problem  ? Assuredly 
not.  The  Jewish  and  Christian  histories  have  been  the 
delight  of  eighteen  centuries,  and  although  they  are 
now  half  vanquished  by  Greek  rationalism,  they  are 
extraordinarily  effective  in  the  amelioration  of  morals. 
The  Bible  in  its  various  transformations  is,  whatever 
may  he  said,  the  great  book  of  consolation  for  human- 
ity. It  is  by  no  means  impossible  that  the  world, 
tired  out  by  the  constant  bankruptcy  of  liberalism, 
will  once  more  become  Jewish  and  Christian.  It 
will  be  then  that  a disinterested  history  of  these 
two  great  creeds  will  be  of  value ; for  the  period 
when  impartial  studies  upon  the  past  of  humanity 
are  possible  to  us  may  not  last  very  long.  The  taste 
for  history  is  the  most  aristocratic  of  tastes ; so  it 
runs  some  risks. 

In  order  to  be  quite  consistent  in  carrying  out 
the  plan  which  I formed  forty  years  ago  of  writing 
the  History  of  the  Origins  of  Christianity  I ought 
to  have  commenced  with  the  present  volume.  The 
origin  of  Christianity  dates  from  the  major  prophets, 
who  introduced  moral  ethics  into  religion  about  850 
b.c.  ; the  prophecies  of  the  ninth  century  have  them- 
selves their  root  in  the  ancient  ideal  of  patriarchal 
life — an  ideal  partly  created  by  the  imagination,  but 


Xll 


PREFACE. 


one  which  had  been  a reality  in  the  distant  past  of  the 
tribe  of  Israel.  My  reason  for  not  observing  this 
chronological  order,  and  for  first  plunging  into  the 
middle  of  my  subject  with  my  Life  of  Jesus  was 
that  human  life  is  uncertain,  and  that  I was  particu- 
larly desirous  of  writing  about  the  first  century  and  a 
half  of  Christianity.  And  then,  as  I am  fain  to 
admit,  Jesus  had  a great  attraction  forme.  The  dream 
of  a kingdom  of  God,  which  would  be  governed  by  the 
law  of  love  and  mutual  self-sacrifice,  had  always  pos- 
sessed a great  charm  for  me.  As  soon  as  I found  that 
I should  probably  have  ample  time  to  deal  with  the 
history  of  Israel  as  I had  dealt  with  the  history  of  Jesus, 
of  the  Apostles,  of  St.  Paul,  and  of  the  early  Churches,  I 
seemed  to  gain  fresh  strength.  For  the  last  six  years  I 
have  given  my  whole  attention  to  this  great  work,  and 
at  the  present  moment  the  history  is  brought  down  to 
the  epoch  of  Ezra;  that  is  to  say,  down  to  the  definite 
constitution  of  Judaism.  If  anything  happened  to  me, 
the  whole  of  this  would  be  ready  for  publication, 
making  in  all  three  volumes,  though  the  two  following 
would  scarcely  be  so  thoroughly  matured  as  this  one. 
If  I live,  the  second  volume  will  appear  in  a twelve- 
month,  and  the  third  in  two  years’  time.  If,  when 
they  have  all  appeared,  I find  that  my  strength  admits 
of  it,  I propose  to  write,  in  one  volume,  the  history  of 
the  time  of  the  Asmoneans.  This  would  bring  me  up 
in  point  of  time  to  the  Life  of  Jesus,  and  so  I should 
have  completed  the  cycle  which  it  was  my  desire  to 
embrace.  This  fourth  volume  is  much  easier  to  com- 


PREFACE. 


xm 


pose  than  the  others.  I may  even  go  so  far  as  to  say 
that  there  is  but  one  way  of  doing  it,  and  should  I 
not  have  time  to  write  it  I should  ask  my  publishers 
to  translate  one  of  the  many  works  on  the  subject 
which  have  been  written  in  Germany,  and  so  complete 
the  work.  But  I confess  that  I am  so  buoyed  up  by 
the  pleasure  of  seeing  it  making  good  progress  that  I 
hope  to  terminate  it  myself,  when  I shall  be  able  to 
chant  with  joy  the  u Lord,  now  lettest  thou  thy  ser- 
vant ” of  the  aged  Simeon. 

In  this  first  volume,  the  great  religious  movement 
of  Israel,  which  swept  the  world  along  with  it,  has 
scarcely  begun.  The  vocation  of  Israel  is  not  yet 
clearly  marked.  That  people  had  not,  as  yet,  any 
clear  mark  upon  its  forehead  to  distinguish  it  from  its 
neighbours  and  congeners.  At  first  it  might  have  been 
taken  for  a small  Syro- Arabian  tribe  like  so  many  others. 
But  the  childhood  of  the  elect  is  full  of  signs  and  prog- 
nostics, which  are  only  recognised  afterwards.  The 
most  important  period  in  the  life  of  great  men  is  their 
youth,  inasmuch  as  it  is  then  that  their  future  is 
mapped  out,  as  it  were,  behind  a veil.  It  was  during 
the  patriarchal  age  that  the  destiny  of  Israel  began  to 
be  written — nothing  in  the  history  of  Israel  can  be 
explained  without  reference  to  the  patriarchal  age. 
This  epoch,  like  all  childhood,  is  obscured  by  the 
night  of  time  ; but  it  is  the  duty  of  the  historian,  who 
is  searching  into  the  causes  of  things,  to  pierce  this 
obscurity  by  the  aid  quite  as  much  of  psychology  as 
of  philology.  It  will  be  objected  that  the  golden  age 


XXV 


PREFA  CE. 


of  the  Aryans  has  quite  as  many  documents  to  back  it 
up  as  the  patriarchal  age,  and  yet  the  former  is  only 
a dream.  The  two  cases  do  not  run  on  parallel  lines. 
The  patriarchal  age  existed ; it  exists  still  in  those 
countries  where  the  nomad  life  of  the  Arabs  is  pre- 
served in  its  original  purity. 

Despite  the  efforts  which  I have  made  not  to  sacri- 
fice admiration  to  critical  examination,  and  at  the 
same  time  to  let  doubt  preserve  its  rights,  I know 
that  the  history  of  Israel,  written  in  this  way,  must 
be  distasteful  to  two  classes  of  persons  : first  of  all,  to 
the  uncompromising  Israelites,  who  insist  on  having 
all  or  nothing,  and  demand  that  the  characteristics 
of  the  past  played  by  Israel  shall  be  spoken  of  in 
a strain  of  unbroken  eulogy.  By  a curious  ethno- 
graphical misapprehension,  the  majority  of  the  Jews 
of  our  day  regard  as  their  ancestors  the  members  of 
the  tribe  in  the  midst  of  which  was  formed,  by  the 
influence  of  an  imperceptible  minority,  the  religion 
which  they  profess.*  A foreigner  never  satisfies  the 
nation  whose  history  he  writes.  Daru  is  regarded  in 
Venice  as  an  enemy;  all  those  who  make  a distinction 
between  ancient  and  modern  Greece  are  regarded  as 
malefactors.  ~No  matter  what  may  be  said  to  the 
contrary,  it  is  true  that  one  can  never  go  far  enough  to 
satisfy  national  vanity.  Speaking  in  January,  1883, 
at  the  Cercle  St.  Simon,  f I said : “ There  is  no  such  a 

* See  the  lecture  on  “ Le  Judaisme  comme  race  et  comme 
religion,”  in  my  Discours  et  Conferences,  p.  341  and  following. 

f In  the  lecture  above  cited. 


PREFACE. 


xv 


thing  as  an  immaculate  history.  The  history  of  the 
Jewish  people  is  one  of  the  most  beautiful  we  have, 
and  I do  not  regret  having  devoted  my  life  to  it.  But 
I am  far  from  asserting  that  it  is  a history  absolutely 
without  blemish,  for  if  it  were,  it  would  be  a history 
outside  humanity.  If  I could  live  a second  life,  I 
should  certainly  devote  it  to  Greek  history,  which  is 
in  some  respects  .a  finer  history  than  that  of  the  Jews. 
They  are,  in  a way  of  speaking,  the  two  dominant 
histories  of  the  world.  Now,  were  I to  write  the 
history  of  the  Greek  peoples,  I should  not  refrain 
from  pointing  out  what  is  blameworthy  in  it.  We  may 
admire  Greece  without  feeling  ourselves  called  upon 
to  admire  Cleon  and  the  evil  pages  in  the  annals  of 
Athenian  demagogy.” 

The  work  of  Israel  was  accomplished,  like  all  human 
undertakings,  by  means  of  violence  and  perfidy,  amidst 
a tempest  of  oppositions,  of  passions,  and  of  crimes 
without  number.  The  Jewish  intellect  derived  its 
strength  from  its  least  sympathetic  characteristics, 
from  its  fanaticism  and  from  its  exclusive  tendencies. 
This  is,  after  all,  a mere  platitude.  The  French 
royalty,  the  Catholic  unity  of  the  Middle  Ages,  Pro- 
testantism, and  the  Kevolution  were  brought  into  being 
by  all  kinds  of  crimes  and  errors.  A great  man  owes 
as  much  to  his  defects  as  to  his  good  qualities.  The 
hardness  and  the  brutal  abruptness  which  so  intelli- 
gibly shock  our  friend  M.  Taine  in  Napoleon  were  a 
part  and  parcel  of  his  force.  Had  he  been  as  well- 
bred,  as  polite,  and  unassuming  as  we  are,  he  would 


XVI 


PREFACE . 


not  have  got  on  ; he  would  have  been  as  powerless  as 
we  are. 

This  history  will  also  he  displeasing  to  the  narrow- 
minded persons  who  have  the  Trench  defect  of  not 
allowing  that  it  is  possible  to  write  the  history  of 
times  concerning  which  one  has  not  a series  of  ma- 
terial facts  to  relate.  There  are  no  facts  of  this  kind 
in  the  history  of  Israel  up  to  the  time  of  David.  In 
order  to  content  historians  of  this  school,  I should 
have  had  to  publish  the  present  volume  as  so  many 
blank  pages.  Such  a method  is,  to  my  mind,  the  very 
negation  of  all  criticism.  It  has  a double  disadvan- 
tage, leading  either  to  gross  credulity  or  to  not  less 
purblind  scepticism ; the  one  side  swallowing  the 
crudest  fables,  while  the  other  side,  in  order  not  to 
take  in  any  fables,  rejects  the  most  precious  truths. 
The  truth  is  that  we  can  still  learn  a good  deal  with 
regard  to  the  epochs  which  are  anterior  to  history, 
strictly  so-called.  The  Homeric  poems  are  not  histo- 
rical books,  and  yet  is  there  anywhere  a single  page 
more  dazzling  with  light  than  the  picture  of  Greek 
life  a thousand  years  b.c.  which  these  poems  give  us  ? 
The  Arab  tales  of  the  ante-Islam  period  are  not 
history,  and  yet  they  admit  of  the  painting  of  pictures 
which  are  wonderfully  true  to  the  original.  The 
Arthurian  romances  of  the  Middle  Ages  do  not  contain 
a word  of  truth,  and  yet  they  are  storehouses  of 
information  as  to  the  social  life  of  the  epoch  in  which 
they  were  written.  The  legends  are  not,  for  the  most 
part,  historical,  and  yet  they  are  marvellously  instruc- 


PREFACE. 


XVII 


tive  as  regards  the  colour  of  the  periods  to  which  they 
belong  and  the  habits  of  the  time. 

Narrow-minded  critics,  who  deny  the  existence  of 
the  obscure  periods  upon  which  we  have  no  strictly 
historical  documents,  deprive  themselves  of  the  truest 
and  most  important  part  of  history.  A romance  is,  in 
its  way,  a document,  when  one  knows  in  what  rela- 
tion it  stands  to  the  age  in  which  it  was  written.  The 
historic  generalities  which  we  derive  from  ancient  texts 
are  truths  arrived  at  by  induction,  but  they  are  none 
the  less  certain  for  all  that.  How  many  things  there 
are  of  which  the  same  may  be  said.  The  whole  system 
of  the  world  is  arrived  at  by  the  inductive  reasoning 
out  of  observations  ; not  by  direct  observation. 

As  I have  said  elsewhere,*  we  do  not  need  to  know, 
in  histories  of  this  kind,  how  things  happened ; it  is 
sufficient  for  us  to  know  how  they  may  have  hap- 
pened. What  was  not  true  in  one  case  was  so  in 
another.  I admit  that  any  opinions  as  to  individuals 
are,  in  these  circumstances,  full  of  possibilities  of  error. 
But  this  is  not  a difficulty  peculiar  to  the  ages  of 
fable  ; judgments  upon  individuals  are,  save  in  excep- 
tional cases,  only  possible  within  an  historic  period 
either  very  rich  in  documents  or  very  near  to  our  own. 
And  even  then  how  many  gates  are  open  for  the 
entrance  of  illusion  ! In  such  a case,  every  phrase 
should  be  accompanied  by  a u perhaps.”  I believe 
that  I have  used  it  pretty  freely,  but  if  the  reader 
thinks  it  does  not  occur  often  enough,  he  can  fill  it  in 
* Life  of  Jesus,  Preface,  pp.  73-75  (Am.  ed.). 


xviii 


PREFA  CE. 


at  his  own  discretion  * If  he  does  this,  he  will  arrive 
exactly  at  what  I think. 

In  reality,  Dom  Calmet  and  Voltaire  are  the  one  as 
incapable  as  the  other  of  understanding  anything  about 
ancient  history,  the  one  admitting  everything  that  is 
written,  the  other  rejecting  everything  as  soon  as  he 
can  detect  a single  flaw  in  the  ancient  writings.  The 
defect  of  each  is  the  same,  and  may  be  summed  up  in 
their  incapacity  to  understand  the  difference  of  the 
times,  and  their  failure  to  seize  what  constitutes  the 
essence  of  popular  tradition.  When  popular  tradition 
knows  nothing,  it  none  the  less  continues  its  babble ; 
and  then  it  takes  shadows  for  giants,  and  words  for 
men.  The  exuberant  feeling  of  trust  and  confidence, 
ending,  when  it  has  been  abused,  in  childish  suspicions 
— the  want  of  criticism,  in  a word,  which  is  charac- 
teristic of  the  French  mind,  in  war  and  in  politics  as 
well  as  in  the  appreciation  of  antiquity — proceeds  as  a 
rule  from  too  great  simplicity  of  conception.  We 
cannot  keep  clear  of  pit-falls,  and  we  reason  about 
Romulus,  FEneas,  and  Joshua,  in  the  same  way  that  we 
do  about  FTapoleon,  just  as  if  we  had  newspapers  or  state 
documents  dating  from  the  time  of  Romulus — just  as 
if  we  knew  FEneas  from  contemporary  evidence — just 
as  if  writing  had  been  an  every-day  affair  in  these 

* The  most  perfect  method  to  adopt  in  a case  of  this  kind  would 
be  that  of  polychromatic  printing,  in  which  each  part  of  a page  or 
even  of  a phrase  would  be  printed  in  inks  of  different  shades,  from 
very  black  ink,  to  mark  certainty,  down  to  the  lightest  possible 
tints,  to  mark  the  various  degrees  of  probability,  plausibility,  and 
possibility.  [This  has  been  done  in  Bissell’s  “Genesis.”] 


PREFACE. 


xix 


remote  times — just  as  if  the  prehistoric  imagery  had 
not  been  floating  for  five  or  six  centuries  amid  the 
mists  of  oral  tradition,  in  which  nothing  is  visible  at  a 
distance  of  half  a century — just  as  if  the  heroes  of  an 
age  in  which  rivers  had  sons,  in  which  mountains 
begat  children,  did  not  require  to  be  treated  in  accord- 
ance with  some  special  rules  ! 

The  Abbe  Bartlielemy  disposed  of  all  these  childish 
ideas  a hundred  years  ago,#  when  he  wrote:  “In 
those  days  there  lived  a man  called  JEneas  ; he  was  of 
illegitimate  birth,  a bigot  and  a coward  ; these  qualities 
won  him  the  esteem  of  King  Priam,  who,  not  knowing 
wrhat  present  to  make  him,  gave  him  one  of  his 
daughters  in  marriage.  His  history  begins  upon  the 
night  that  Troy  was  taken.  He  quitted  the  city,  lost 
his  wife  on  the  way,  took  ship,  had  an  intrigue  with 
Dido,  Queen  of  Carthage,  who  survived  him  for 
four  centuries,  got  up  some  very  amusing  sports  near 
the  tomb  of  his  father,  Anchises,  who  had  died  in 
Sicily,  and  eventually  landed  in  Italy,  near  the  mouth 
of  the  Tiber,  where  the  first  object  which  met  his 
gaze  was  a sow  which  had  just  given  birth  to  thirty 
white  pigs.” 

I agree  with  Barthelemy  that  history  does  not  lose 
much  by  being  deprived  of  such  stuff  as  this.  If, 
when  what  is  legendary  has  been  eliminated  or  treated 
as  legendary,  there  remains  but  an  indistinct  contour 
of  figures  which  were  once  striking,  no  doubt,  but 
which  the  hand  of  time  has  effaced,  there  is  no  help 
* The  Mercure  de  France , 1792,  No.  13. 


XX 


PREFACE . 


for  it.  History  must  perforce  extract  as  much  truth, 
as  possible  from  the  indications  which  it  has  at  com- 
mand ; it  is  doing  a very  sorry  work  when  it  relates  a 
number  of  childish  stories  in  a tone  of  the  utmost 
seriousness.  To  depict  the  great  men  of  a remote 
antiquity  in  the  dimness  of  their  distant  past  is  not 
equivalent  to  diminishing  their  proportions.  A giant 
placed  in  the  furthest  horizon  of  a picture  is  not  the 
less  a giant ; but  it  would  be  contrary  to  all  reason  to 
give  the  giant  the  position  of  a figure  in  the  fore- 
ground. Thus,  for  instance,  it  is  no  fault  of  mine  if 
Moses,  at  the  distance  at  which  he  stands,  has  the 
appearance  of  a shapeless  column,  like  the  pillar  of 
salt  which  represents  Lot’s  wife.  Moses,  if  he  ever 
existed,  which  there  is  every  reason  to  suppose  that 
he  did,  is  fourteen  or  fifteen  centuries  anterior  to 
Jesus.  Jesus  is  known  to  us  by  at  least  one  contem- 
porary piece  of  evidence,  that  of  St.  Paul.  His  legend 
is  the  work  of  the  second  and  third  generation  of 
Christians.  The  oldest  legends  relating  to  Moses  are 
at  least  four  or  five  centuries  posterior  to  the  age  in 
which  he  lived,  perhaps  more.  Ho  one  ever  blamed 
Eaphael  for  having,  in  his  picture  of  the  Transfigu- 
ration, painted  Christ  in  heaven  smaller  than  the 
apostles  and  the  multitude  of  people  upon  the 
ground. 

It  has  only  been  through  the  energetic  efforts  of 
modern  criticism  and  philology  that  an  insight  has 
been  obtained  into  the  truth  of  these  ancient  texts, 
which  seemed  expressly  designed  to  lead  us  astray. 


PREFACE. 


xx  l 


The  old  epic  tales,  related  in  good  faith,  the  theo- 
cratic after-touches,  and  the  sacerdotal  revisions  are 
now  and  then  piled  one  upon  the  other,  in  the  same 
paragraph,  and  it  needs  a very  practised  eye  to  detect 
them.  The  problem  is  analogous  to  that  presented  by 
the  Herculaneum  rolls,  where  the  eye  can  at  first  see 
nothing  but  hundreds  of  letters,  without  being  able  to 
say  to  what  pages  they  belong,  all  the  sheets  sticking 
together  and  forming  one  carbonised  mass.  In  the 
same  way,  in  the  historical  parts  of  the  Bible,  the 
different  wordings  so  run  into  one  another,  the  scissors 
of  the  compilers  have  been  plied  so  capriciously,  that 
it  is  often  impossible  to  make  any  attempt  to  sort 
them  out.*  The  art  of  the  critic,  nevertheless,  some- 
times answers  with  wonderful  success  the  challenges 
cast  down  to  our  sagacity.  During  the  last  twenty 
years,  more  especially,  the  problems  relating  to  the 
history  of  Israel  have  been  dissected  with  rare  pene- 
tration by  Beuss,  Graf,  Kuenen,  Noeldeke,  Wellhausen, 
and  Stade.  I assume  that  my  readers  are  familiar  with 
the  works  of  these  eminent  men.  They  will  find  in 
them  the  explanation  of  a number  of  points  which  I 
cordd  not  treat  in  detail  without  repeating  what  has 
already  been  said  very  well. 

The  requirements  of  chronological  order,  which  must 
be  observed  in  history,  will  explain  why  a number  of 

* As  regards  the  Hexateuch,  I would  advise  those  who  are 
desirous  of  keeping  themselves  well  informed  to  read  the  Perpetual 
Commentary  of  M.  Dillmann,  who  exhibits  the  systems  in  a very 
complete  form,  and  admits  of  a free  and  unbiassed  opinion  being 
formed. 


xxii 


PREFACE. 


questions,  which  are  in  connexity  with  those  treated  in 
this  volume,  will  only  be  completely  elucidated  in  the 
second,  this  being  especially  the  case  with  the  ques- 
tions relating  to  the  age  and  authority  of  the  texts, 
I have  been  compelled  to  make  use  in  this  volume  of 
texts  the  composition  and  remodelling  of  which  will 
only  be  set  forth  in  the  second  volume.  In  order 
that  my  readers  may  be  able  forthwith  to  see  by  what 
principles  of  criticism  I have  been  guided,  I have  put 
together  in  four  articles,  which  appeared  in  the  Revue 
des Deux Mondes  (March  1 and  15,  Dec.  1 and  15, 188G), 
the  principal  passages  of  the  second  and  of  the  third 
volume  which  relate  to  the  compilation  of  the  historical 
books  of  the  Bible.  Those  who  may  think  it  worth 
while  to  read  these  four  articles  will  be  able  to  form 
an  idea  of  the  system  of  literary  history  which  will  be 
developed  in  the  following  volumes. 

This  system  only  differs,  moreover,  in  one  respect 
from  that  which  is  followed  in  the  great  German  and 
Dutch  schools.  Side  by  side  with  the  so-called  Jeho- 
vist  version  of  the  Hexateuch,  which  appears  to  have 
been  composed  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel  about  800  b.c., 
I admit  an  ancient  Elohist , which  I imagine  to  have 
been  composed  at  Jerusalem  rather  later,  about  the 
time  of  Hczekiah.  I thus  avoid  ascribing  to  a modern 
period  the  Elohist  parts,  such  as  the  beginning  of 
Genesis,  which  are  so  different  from  what  the  Jews 
have  done  since  the  Captivity.  My  views  as  to  the 
Iasar , the  Book  of  the  Wars  of  Iahveh , and,  speaking 
generally,  all  the  old  books  of  an  epic,  idyllic,  and 


PREFACE.  xxiii 

almost  secular  character,  which  preceded  any  compila- 
tion of  the  Pentateuch,  are  foreshadowed  in  advance 
in  the  present  volume.  Regarded  from  a documentary 
point  of  view,  these  books,  written  in  the  kingdom 
of  the  North  and  anterior  to  the  great  prophetic  era, 
constitute  very  nearly  the  series  which  the  German 
critics  designate  by  the  letter  B. 

With  regard  to  the  proper  names  which  are  known, 
I have  adhered  to  the  transcriptions  in  general  use, 
even  when  these  transcriptions  are  more  or  less 
defective,  as  in  the  case  of  Salomon , Mo'ise  (Solomon, 
Moses),  &c.  In  the  case  of  names  which  have  no 
recognised  modern  equivalent,  I have  created  French 
transcriptions  in  conformity  with  our  habits,  following 
the  ancient  versions  and  not  omitting  the  massoretic 
vowels,  though  without  any  servile  adhesion  to  them. 
I have  done  my  best  to  make  all  the  names  easy  of 
pronunciation,  without  any  special  sign  or  notation. 
As  a general  rule,  it  will  be  found  that  each  Hebrew 
consonant  has  been  represented  by  a single  letter.  The 
only  real  difficulty  was  in  the  case  of  the  Hebrew 
schin,  answering  to  the  English  sh,  the  German  sch,  to 
the  French  ch  in  chose.  These  different  transcriptions 
give  rise  to  all  kinds  of  misapprehensions.  The  Greek 
and  Latin  translators,  who  have  found  themselves 
face  to  face  with  the  same  difficulty,  have  rendered 
the  Hebraic  cliuintante  by  the  simple  sibilant.  I have 
followed  their  example  in  order  to  avoid  the  accumu- 
lation of  letters,  which  are  a cause  of  perpetual 
embarrassment  for  the  French  reader. 


c 


PREFACE. 


xxiv 

The  corrections  which  I have  been  led  to  suggest 
in  the  Ilebrew  texts  are  indicated  in  the  notes.  The 
great  advances  made  during  the  last  thirty  years  by 
Semitic  paleography — advances  which  are  the  result 
of  the  vast  progress  of  Semitic  epigraphy — now 
enable  us  to  apply,  without  fear  of  error,  to  the  text 
of  the  Bible  the  method  of  verbal  criticism  inaugu- 
rated in  the  eighteenth  century  by  Pere  Houbigant. 
The  insufficient  data  which  were  to  be  had  with 
regard  to  the  history  of  the  Semitic  writings  made  it 
impossible  for  this  study  to  be  founded  upon  any 
solid  basis  at  that  time.  But  in  the  present  state  of 
science  the  future  of  Hebraic  philology  lies  in  this 
direction.  Formerly,  the  traditional  Hebrew  text  was 
received  with  a sort  of  superstitious  reverence,  people 
forgetting  that  the  ancient  versions  have  often  fol- 
lowed a better  text.  Since  we  have  been  able  to 
reconstitute  century  by  century  the  way  in  which  the 
Hebrew  writings  were  copied,  the  mistakes  have 
become  evident,  and  it  has  been  found  possible  to  lay 
down  rules  for  correcting  them.  These  rules,  based 
upon  paleography,  are  the  principal  subject  of  my 
lectures  at  the  College  de  France.  They  will  be 
found  very  faithfully  summarised  in  the  preface  of 
M.  Gratz’s  Commentary  upon  the  Psalms.  Those 
who  are  desirous  of  making  themselves  acquainted 
with  these  interesting  researches  must,  in  the  first 
place,  have  before  them  the  excellent  tables  of  Semi- 
tic paleography  drawn  up  by  M.  Euting. 

The  portion  of  Hebraic  history  dealt  with  in  this 


PREFACE . 


XX7 


volume  derives  valuable  light  from  Assyriology  and 
Egyptology,  those  two  great  scientific  creations  of  our 
century.  In  regard  to  the  former,  in  his  connection 
with  the  Eible,  a very  useful  manual  is  M.  Schrader’s 
book,  each  edition  of  which  keeps  the  reader  well 
posted  up  in  the  condition  of  that  science.  In  respect 
to  Egyptology  I have  found  the  best  and  safest  of 
guides  in  my  learned  colleague,  M.  Maspero,  who  has 
been  kind  enough  to  read  all  the  chapters  in  this 
volume  which  touch  upon  Egypt,  and  to  supply  me 
with  some  very  lucid  notes  which  I have  reprinted  as 
they  came  from  him. 

Since  I first  began  to  address  myself  to  the  public 
upon  religious  history,  now  forty  years  ago,  great 
changes  have  taken  place.  People  no  longer  argue 
with  one  another  as  to  the  very  foundation  of  religion, 
and  that,  to  my  mind,  is  a distinct  step  in  advance. 
It  is  equivalent  to  admitting  that  there  is  room,  in  the 
infinite,  for  every  one  to  fashion  his  own  romance. 
Liberty,  as  understood  in  America,  is  the  consequence 
of  such  a condition  of  things,  and  my  belief  is  that, 
in  the  course  of  another  century,  nearly  all  the  civil- 
ised nations  will  reach  this  point.  We  can  afford  to 
wait  in  patience,  for,  even  at  the  present  time,  in 
nearly  all  civilised  countries,  no  one  is  compelled  to 
act  in  any  way  contrary  to  his  conscience,  everybody 
being  free  to  contract  marriage,  bring  up  his  children, 
and  arrange  for  his  funeral  in  the  way  that  seems  best 
to  him.  This  is  an  immense  result  to  have  obtained. 
Once  it  is  allowed  that  all  the  Churches,  if  not  of 

C 2 


XXVI 


PREFACE. 


equal  value,  are  a matter  of  tradition  and  not  of 
absolute  truth,  there  is  no  reason  why  peojfie  should 
be  at  variance  as  to  what  is  but  a material  fact  of 
history.  The  interminable  polemics  to  which  the 
struggles  of  Catholicism,  Protestantism,  and  Judaism 
have  given  rise,  have  ceased  to  be  of  any  consequence 
outside  the  historical  movement  which  they  have 
brought  about. 

This  historical  interest,  at  all  events,  is  in  no  way 
impaired.  For  a long  time  to  come  people  will  con- 
cern themselves  about  religions,  after  they  have  ceased 
to  believe  in  them.  The  downfall  of  theology  does 
not  imply  the  downfall  of  the  history  of  theology, 
any  more  than  the  small  interest  which  now  attaches 
to  the  study  of  metaphysical  philosophy  deprives  the 
history  of  ancient  philosophy  of  its  interest.  To  see 
the  past  as  it  really  was  is  the  first  delight  of  man, 
and  the  noblest — I may  add  the  most  useful — of  his 
curiosities.  It  is  always  good  to  know  the  truth.  If 
we  could  know  the  truth  as  to  the  past  and  the 
present  of  humanity,  we  should  be  perfect  in  our 
wisdom.  Every  fault  has  its  origin  in  an  error.  If 
Louis  XIY  had  learned  the  history  of  Protestantism 
from  a better  source  than  that  of  his  Gallican  theo- 
logians, he  would  not  have  revoked  the  Edict  of 
Nantes.  If  St.  Louis  had  possessed  a better  know- 
ledge of  the  history  of  the  Church,  he  would  not  have 
allowed  his  subjects  to  be  decimated  by  the  Inqui- 
sition. If  Marcus-Aurelius  had  been  better  versed  in 
the  history  of  Christianity,  the  atrocious  scenes  of  the 


PREFACE. 


XXVll 


amphitheatre  at  Lyons  would  never  have  been 
witnessed.  If  the  legislators  of  the  Revolution  had 
known  more  of  the  essence  of  Catholicism  from  the 
time  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  they  would  never  have 
dreamed  of  creating  a French  National  Church.  If 
the  Radical  party  in  France  at  the  present  day  was 
not  so  ignorant  of  religious  history,  it  would  know 
that  religions  are  like  women,  who  can  be  got  to  do 
anything  if  they  are  taken  in  the  right  way,  but  of 
whom  you  can  obtain  nothing  if  you  attempt  to  use 
force. 

And  is  this  sceptical  or  negative  result  the  only  one 
which  comes  out  of  the  study  of  this  long  series  of 
errors  ? Is  it,  after  all,  a matter  of  much  importance 
to  know  what  weary  stages  poor  humanity  has  travelled 
to  find  that  the  summits  of  Olympus  and  Mount  Sinai 
are  deserts,  that  the  heavens  are  void  and  the  earth 
very  small,  that  thunder  is  a phenomenon  of  more  ap- 
parent than  real  amplitude,  that  the  rainbow  is  but  a 
play  of  light  refracted  in  the  raindrops?  Not  so. 
The  reasoning  of  Kant  remains  as  true  as  ever  it  was  ; 
moral  affirmation  creates  its  object.  Religions,  like 
philosophies,  are  all  of  them  vain ; but  religion  is  no 
more  vain  than  philosophy  is.  Without  the  hope  of  any 
recompense,  man  devotes  himself  to  his  duty  even 
unto  death.  A victim  of  the  injustice  of  his  fellow- 
men,  he  lifts  his  eyes  to  heaven.  A generous  cause, 
in  which  his  own  interests  are  in  no  way  concerned, 
often  makes  his  heart  beat.  The  elohim  are  not 
hidden  aloft  in  the  eternal  snows,  they  are  not  to  be 


XXV1U 


PREFACE. 


met  with,  as  in  the  time  of  Moses,  in  the  mountain  de- 
files ; they  dwell  in  the  heart  of  man.  You  will  never 
drive  them  out  of  that.  Justice,  truth,  and  goodness 
are  willed  by  a higher  power.  The  progress  of  reason 
was  fatal  only  to  the  false  gods.  The  true  God  of 
the  universe,  the  one  God,  lie  whom  men  adore  when 
they  do  a good  deed,  or  when  they  seek  the  truth,  or 
when  they  advise  their  fellow-men  aright,  is  estab- 
lished for  all  eternity.  It  is  the  certain  knowledge  of 
having  served,  after  my  own  fashion,  despite  all  manner 
of  defects,  this  good  cause  which  inspires  me  with 
absolute  confidence  in  the  divine  goodness.  It  is  the 
conviction  that  this  book  will  be  of  service  to  religious 
progress  which  has  made  me  love  it.  As  in  the  case 
of  the  Life  of  Jesus,  I demand  for  the  present  volume, 
dealing  as  it  does  with  very  obscure  times,  a little  of 
that  indulgence  which  it  is  usual  to  grant  to  seers,  and 
of  which  seers  stand  in  need.  Moreover,  supposing 
that  I have  conjectured  wrongly  upon  certain  points, 
I am  certain  that  I have  rightly  understood  as  a whole 
the  unique  work  which  the  Spirit  of  God,  that  is  to 
say  the  soul  of  the  world,  has  realised  through  Israel. 


HISTORY  OF 

THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL 


♦» 

BOOK  L 

THE  BENI-ISRA EL  IN  THE  NOMAD  STATE  DOWN 
TO  THEIR  SETTLEMENT  IN  THE  LAND  OF 
CANAAN. 


CHAPTER  I. 

ARRIVAL  OF  THE  SEMITES  IN  SYRIA. —CANA ANITES. 

The  passage  from  the  animal  state  to  humanity  did 
not  take  place  upon  a single  part  of  the  globe,  nor  by 
a single  spontaneous  effort.  From  several  directions, 
either  simultaneously  or  successively,  the  human  con- 
science unravelled  itself,  elevated  itself,  purified  itself, 
conceived  the  idea  of  justice,  asserted  the  principles  of 
right  and  duty.  Language  then  came  in  to  define  and 
establish  these  conquests  of  mind  over  matter.  The 
capitalisation  of  results,  the  solidarity  of  different 
generations,  which  are  the  essential  conditions  of  pro- 
gress, were  henceforth  rendered  certain. 

Language,  like  morality  itself,  was  not  the  result  of 
one  single  creation.  The  different  tongues  were  formed 
separately,  in  diverse  centres ; they  constituted  irre- 


. V'  j HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

• diicible  families,  types  which,  once  formed,  ran  on 
side  by  side  for  centuries,  without  undergoing  any 
material  modification.  There  then  ensued  an  element 
of  grouping  and  separation  of  more  capital  importance 
than  the  question  of  race.  For  the  point  which  it  is 
necessary  to  bring  into  prominent  notice  is  that  the 
appearance  of  what  may  be  called  the  different  human 
species  upon  the  one  hand,  and  the  appearance  of  the 
different  families  of  languages  upon  the  other,  were 
facts  separated  from  each  other  by  many  centuries,  so 
much  so  that  the  division  of  human  species  and  the 
division  of  the  families  of  languages  do  not  at  all 
coincide.* 

In  each  centre  of  linguistic  creation,  there  were 
already  individuals  of  very  different  species.  It  may 
well  have  been,  moreover,  that  families  very  nearly 
related  from  the  physiological  point  of  view,  but 
already  separated  from  one  another,  created  their 
language  upon  quite  different  types. 

In  this  way,  languages  represent  not  ethnographical 
divisions  of  humanity,  but  constitutional  facts  of  great 
antiquity  and  of  incalculable  importance  ; for  language, 
being  for  any  one  race  the  very  form  and  fashion  of 
thought,  the  use  of  the  same  tongue,  continued  for 
centuries,  becomes,  for  the  family  which  confines  itself 
to  the  same,  a mould,  a corset  so  to  speak,  more  bind- 
ing than  even  religion,  legislation,  manners,  and 

* I have  dilated  upon  this  point  in  Les  Longues  et  les  Races , a 
lecture  delivered  at  the  Sorbonne,  March,  2,  1878  ( Bulletin  els 
V Association  scientifique  de  France , No.  540). 


ARRIVAL  OF  THE  SEMITES  IN  SYRIA. 


3 


customs.  Race  of  itself  without  the  institutions  ap- 
pertaining to  it  is  of  trifling  importance ; the  institu- 
tions are  like  the  barrel-hoops  by  which  the  internal 
capacity  of  a durable  recipient  is  determined.  Of 
all  institutions,  the  most  long-lived  is  language.  Thus 
language  took  almost  entirely  the  place  of  race  in  the 
division  of  humanity  into  groups ; or,  to  put  it  in 
another  way,  the  word  “ race  ” assumed  a different 
meaning.  Language,  religion,  laws,  and  customs, 
came  to  constitute  the  race  far  more  than  blood.  The 
blood  itself,  by  means  of  the  hereditary  qualities  which 
it  transmitted,  perpetuated  institutions  and  habits  of 
education  far  more  than  it  did  a genius  inherent  in 
the  germs  of  life. 

We  must  assume  primitive  humanity  to  have  been 
very  malevolent.  The  chief  characteristics  of  man  for 
many  centuries  were  craft,  a refinement  of  cunning, 
and  a degree  of  lubricity,  which,  like  that  of  the 
monkey,  knew  neither  times  nor  seasons.  But  amid 
this  mass  of  shameless  satyrs,  there  were  some  groups 
which  had  the  germs  of  better  things  in  them.  Love  was 
in  the  course  of  time  idealized  in  dreams.  Slowly 
but  surely  a principle  of  authority  was  established. 
The  need  for  order  created  the  hierarchy.  Force  was 
met  by  imposture,  and  sacerdotal  offices  were  founded 
by  working  upon  the  superstitious  fears  of  men. 
Certain  men  persuaded  others  that  they  were  the 
necessary  intermediaries  between  them  and  the 
divinity.  All  this  led  to  the  creation  of  societies 
analogous  to  the  Negro  societies  of  Dahomey,  of 


4 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


considerable  strength,  complicated,  tyrannical,  super- 
stitious, devoid  of  morality,  swift  to  shed  blood.  There 
was  scarcely  such  a thing  as  family.  The  child,  in 
those  early  ages,  knew  only  his  mother,  women  being 
the  common  property  of  the  tribe. 

The  progress  effected  for  centuries  together  within 
the  fold  of  families  comparatively  well  endowed  with 
intelligence  derived  from  these  primitive  groupings, 
resulted  not  in  liberty,  nor  yet  morality,  but  a fairly 
well-regulated  state  of  things,  in  which  much  that  was 
valuable  was  gained.  In  the  distance  of  six  or  seven 
thousand  years  from  the  age  in  which  we  live,  we  can 
still  catch  a glimpse  of  three  or  four  civilisations,  or,  to 
put  it  better,  three  or  four  great  human  hives,  having 
their  regular  rules,  their  mode  of  life,  their  language, 
and  their  religious  rites.  They  resembled  republics 
of  bees  or  of  ants.  The  alluvial  basins  of  the  great 
rivers  appear  to  have  been  very  favourable  to  this 
early  type  of  civilisation,  of  which  China,  now  a 
wizened,  old-fashioned-looking  child,  has  handed  down 
the  pattern  to  the  present  day.  The  Yellow  Paver,  at 
the  eastern  extremity  of  Asia,  the  Ganges,  to  the  south 
of  the  Himalayas,  the  Tigris  and  the  Euphrates  in 
Hither  Asia,  and  the  Nile  in  Africa  witnessed  the 
expansion  of  societies  which  were  very  perfect  from 
the  point  of  view  of  their  general  mechanism,  but  in 
which  individual  liberty  and  genius  appear  to  have 
had  no  place.  They  were  so  many  human  flocks 
governed  by  a king,  who  was  the  son  of  Heaven, 
amid  which  one  would  look  in  vain  for  the  principle 


ARRIVAL  OF  THE  SEMITES  IN  SYRIA. 


5 


which  formed  the  Greek  city,  the  Jewish  clmrch,  the 
Germanic  league,  feudalism,  chivalry,  constitutional 
monarchy,  a republic  of  reason.  In  such  societies  as 
these  order  is  secured  administratively  by  mandarins,  by 
heads  of  departments,  by  an  organised  police.  There  is 
no  such  thing  as  a great  statesman,  a great  orator,  a great 
citizen.  There  is  no  more  trace  of  a revolution  or  of  a 
protest  against  the  established  order  of  things  than  in 
an  ant-hill.  It  must  not  be  forgotten,  however,  that 
it  was  these  ancient  societies  which  laid  the  first  bases 
of  the  human  edifice  and  made  nearly  all  the  material 
inventions.  Chaldea  and  Egypt,  in  particular,  sup- 
plied the  Greeks  and  the  Hebrews,  not  with  their 
genius  assuredly,  but  with  the  essential  elements  of 
their  extraordinary  work ; they  inoculated  the  Greeks 
and  Hebrews  with  a host  of  ideas  which  these  latter 
made  fruitful  and  beneficial  for  humanity. 

About  the  year  2000  b.c.  we  find  an  entirely  new 
element  making  its  appearance  in  history.  The  Aryans 
and  the  Semites  make  their  presence  felt  in  the  world. 
Ear  from  first  becoming  civilised  in  great  agglomera- 
tions at  a time,  these  races  began,  apparently,  with 
the  idea  of  the  individual  defending  his  rights  against 
those  around  him.  Their  starting-point  was  the 
family.  Like  all  great  things  the  family  was  founded 
by  the  most  atrocious  means  ; millions  of  women 
stoned  to  death  paved  the  way  to  conjugal  fidelity. 
Jealousy,  though  not  based  upon  a very  noble  prin- 
ciple, became  an  essential  condition  of  progress.  The 
male  kept  guard  over  his  female.  Armed  with  a club 


6 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


and  aided  by  his  dog,  the  honest  satyr  kept  watch  in 
front  of  the  small  fortification  he  had  built ; at  the 
slightest  suspicion  he  put  the  adulterous  female  to 
death  by  stoning  her.  These  groups,  noble  in  their 
conceptions  by  comparison  with  the  others,  closed 
their  ranks  and  formed  camps  strong  enough  to  isolate 
them  amid  the  night  of  anarchy  by  which  they  were 
surrounded. 

Thus  there  emerged  from  the  savage  state  what 
may  be  called  barbarian  morality,  which  we  catch  a 
glimpse  of  in  remote  antiquity  under  two  types,  the 
Aryan  and  the  Semitic.  Material  civilisation  may, 
when  these  two  types  of  relative  probity  appeared, 
have  seemed  to  be  already  old  ; but  true  morality  in 
reality  was  born  with  them.  Chaldea  was  in  posses- 
sion of  those  singular  institutions  which  were  destined 
to  become  in  some  respects  so  favourable  to  the 
awakening  of  the  human  intellect.  Egypt  had  reached 
its  utmost  expansion,  and  even  in  its  maturity  the 
first  symptoms  of  its  decrepitude  were  apparent. 
China  was  at  once  young  and  decrepit,  almost  as  well 
administered  as  ever  she  had  been.  The  new-comers, 
upon  the  contrary,  were  rugged,  very  inferior  to  the 
Egyptians  and  the  ancient  Babylonians  of  the  ante- 
Semitic  period  in  all  that  related  to  the  material  com- 
forts of  life ; but  they  had  the  inward  fire,  poesy, 
passion,  melancholy,  the  craving  for  another  life,  the 
secret  of  the  future.  The  family  principle,  which  im- 
plies womanly  modesty,  had  with  the  Aryans  all  the 
strength  of  a band  of  iron.  The  tribe  was,  among  the 


ARRIVAL  OF  THE  SEMITES  IN  SYRIA. 


7 


Semites,  a school  of  pride,  respect,  and  mutual  self- 
devotion.  Out  of  this  common  ground  there  arose 
very  marked  moral  and  intellectual  differences.  Strict 
monogamy  was  the  law  of  primitive  Aryanism.* 
Woman  had,  at  first,  to  share  fully  the  duties  and 
the  dangers  of  the  family,  and  this  conferred  certain 
manly  and  determined  characteristics  upon  her.  The 
child  was  brought  up  in  common  by  his  father  and 
mother ; he  received  the  impress  of  his  parents  with 
extraordinary  force.  With  the  Semites  the  spirit  of 
race  was  manifested  in  a not  less  marked  degree; 
but  monogamy  was  not  strictly  observed.*!*  A respect- 
able man  was  at  liberty  to  possess  several  wives  at  the 
same  time.  In  religion  the  contrast  was  not  less 
marked.  The  primitive  religion  of  the  Aryan  was 
unbridled  polytheism.  From  the  most  ancient  times 
the  Semite  patriarch  had  a secret  tendency  towards 
monotheism,  or  at  least  towards  a simple  and  compara- 
tively reasonable  worship. 

The  languages,  in  particular,  offered  a marked  con- 
trast. The  languages  of  the  Aryans  and  the  Semites 
differed  essentially,  though  there  were  points  of  con- 
nexity  between  them.  The  Aryan  language  was 
immensely  superior,  especially  in  regard  to  the  conju- 
gation of  verbs.  This  marvellous  instrument,  created 

* The  Aryan  marriages  may  be  judged  from  the  model  of  the 
Roman  marriages,  the  Romans  offering  the  oldest  type  of  Aryaa 
society. 

t See,  for  further  details,  Hist,  des  langues  semitiques,  b.  i.  ch.  i., 
and  b.  v.  ch.  ii. ; also  Observations  sur  le  monotheisme  dcs  peoples 
semitiques , in  the  Journal  asiatique,  Feb.-March,  April-May,  1859. 


8 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


by  the  instinct  of  primitive  man,  contained  in  the 
germ  all  the  metaphysics  which  were  afterwards  to  he 
developed  through  the  Hindoo  genius,  the  Greek 
genius,  the  German  genius.  The  Semitic  language, 
upon  the  contrary,  started  by  making  a capital  fault 
in  regard  to  the  verb.  The  greatest  blunder  which 
this  race  has  made  (for  it  was  the  most  irreparable), 
was  to  adopt,  in  treating  the  verb,  a mechanism  so 
faulty  that  the  expression  of  the  tenses  and  moods  has 
always  been  imperfect  and  cumbersome.  Even  at  the 
present  time  the  Arab  has  to  struggle  in  vain  against 
the  linguistic  blunder  which  his  ancestors  made  ten  or 
fifteen  thousand  years  ago. 

The  Aryan  race,  about  the  year  2000  b.c.,  had  its 
centre  in  ancient  Arya  (now  Afghanistan),  and  thence 
it  had  already  thrown  out  eastward  and  northward 
branches  which  were  in  time  to  become  Celts, 
Scythians  (Germans  and  Sclavs),  Pelasgi  (Greeks  and 
Italiots).  About  the  same  time  the  heart  of  the 
Semitic  race  appears  to  have  been  in  Arabia, 
which  was  less  arid  than  it  is  now  and  from  Arabia 
seems  to  have  started  the  conquest  which  made  of 
Babylonia,  hitherto  Turanian,  Cushite  or  Cephenian, 
a Semitic  country.  The  Arameans  f probably  followed 
the  same  course.  Finally,  according  to  ancient 

* In  our  time,  Arabia,  especially  the  southern  part,  is  still 
drying  up.  Water  is  disappearing  from  places  where  it  used  to 
exist,  and  the  inhabitants  are  emigrating  towards  Persia. 

f The  intimate  connection  between  the  ancient  Aramaic  and  the 
ancient  Arabic  is  one  of  the  most  striking  outcomes  of  the  pr<>* 
gress  of  Semitic  epigraphy.  See  Revue  tie  archeologie  oriental et 


ARRIVAL  OF  THE  SEMITES  IN  SYRIA. 


9 


traditions,  it  is  from  Arabia  also  that  came  into  the 
basin  of  the  Mediterranean  the  peoples  who  called 
themselves  Kenaani , and  whom  the  Greeks  named 
Phoenicians* . These  peoples  spread  along  the  sea-shore, 
from  the  small  island  of  Euad  to  Jatfa.  They  spoke  a 
language  very  analogous  to  what  we  call  Ilebrew.t 
There  is  nothing  to  show  that  they  were  ever  nomad. 
From  the  very  first  they  entered  upon  trade  and 
navigation,  founding  the  great  commercial  and  indus- 
trial cities  of  Sidon,  Aradus,  and  the  more  hieratic 
city  of  Gebal  (Byblos).  Although  they  never  formed 
any  real  continental  empire,  there  were  Canaanite 
tribes  in  the  interior,  and  the  whole  of  Palestine, 
especially  to  the  west  of  the  river  J ordan,  was  peopled 
with  them. 

Syria  thus  became  an  entirely  Semitic  country.  The 
lists  of  the  names  of  the  Syrian  towns  referred  to  in 

year  1,  No.  II.  (1885),  and  the  inscriptions  discovered  by  M. 
Doughty,  published  in  the  Notices  et  Extraits  of  the  Academie  des 
Inscriptions  et  Belles-Lettres,  vol.  xviii.  part  i. ; Revue  de  etudes 
juives,  July-Sept.,  1884,  p.  1 and  following.  All  inscriptions 
proceeding  from  Arabic  are  Aramaic.  The  'Epep/Soi  of  Homer 
(Odyssey,  iv.  84)  vacillate  curiously  between  'B“)N  and  'my. 
Strabo,  xvi.  iv.  27. 

* Herodotus,  i.  i.  1.  Herr  Budde’s  system  ( Bibl . TJrgeschiclite , 
p.  343  and  following)  as  to  the  non-identity  of  the  Kenaani  and 
Phoenicians  is  refuted  by  the  coinage  of  Laodicea  (]37322  CS),  by 
the  tenth  chapter  of  Genesis,  by  the  acceptation  of  the  term  '33732, 
merchant,  by  the  Book  of  Judges,  ch.  xviii.  v.  7,  in  which  the 
Sidonian  mode  is  assuredly  the  Phoenician  mode,  &c.  Isaiah, 
ch.  xix.  v.  18. 

t See  Corpus,  inscr.  semit.,  part  i.,  the  names  of  the  Canaanite 
towns  and  kings  are  almost  Hebrew. 


10 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


the  conquests  of  the  Tothmes  and  the  Eameses  are  full 
of  Semitic  words.*  The  Khetas,  whom  the  Egyptian 
annals  so  often  mention  as  detested  neighbours,  are 
probably  the  Canaanite  Hittim , whose  centre  was  at 
Hebron,  hut  whose  name  seems  to  have  been  often 
used  to  designate  the  Canaanite  populations']*  and  even 
Syria.  The  name  of  Rotenu,  which  is  also  used 
by  the  Egyptians  to  designate  the  populations  of  Syria, 
is  probably  the  name  of  Lotn , or  Lot , which  is  con- 
nected with  the  country  about  the  Dead  Sea.§  The 
primitive  races  of  Emim , Zomzommim , and  Enaldm , 
were  reduced  to  mere  insignificant  handfuls. || 

Egypt  exercised  a kind  of  suzerainty  over  the 
country.  But,  beyond  the  boundaries  of  the  rich 
Phoenician  cities,  this  suzerainty  was  nominal,  being 
confined  to  expeditions,  which  were  renewed  from 
reign  to  reign,  and  which  always  resulted  in  an  easy 
triumph.  What  little  art  there  was  in  the  country 
bore  an  Egyptian  imprint  of  the  most  marked 
character.^} 

* Mariette,  Karnak,  pi.  17 — 26  ; Les  Listes  geogr.  des  pylones  de 
Karnak,  quarto,  1875,  with  folio  atlas  ; Maspero  in  the  Zeitschrift 
fur  LEgypt.  Sprache,  1881,  pp.  119 — 131  ; and  in  the  Memoirs  of 
the  Victoria  Institute , 1886,  1887 ; Chabas,  Le  voyage  d'un  Egyp- 
tien,  quarto,  Paris,  1866.  t See  Gesenius,  Thes.,  word  nn. 

{ This  would  be  an  abuse  of  terms,  just  as  it  is  to  employ  the 
word  “ Allemand  ” to  designate  all  the  Germans,  or  the  word 
“ Anglais  ” to  designate  all  British  subjects. 

§ See  Gesenius,  words  taib  and  These  two  names 

appear  to  be  of  equivalent  value. 

||  The  establishment  of  the  Philistines  is  posterior  to  this.  See 
pp.  133,  134. 

H See  Missions  de  Phenicie , conclusions. 


CHAPTER  II. 


THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 

The  Semitic  invasion  of  Syria  was  not  confined  to  the 
Phoenicians,  the  Klietas,  and  the  Rotenu.  For  cen- 
turies the  region  of  the  Jordan  and  of  the  Dead  Sea 
was  invaded  by  new  comers,  who  spoke  nearly  the 
same  language  as  the  Canaanites.  The  settlement  of 
the  Semitic  hordes  and  their  transformation  to  town  life 
were  gradual  processes,  and  did  not  affect  the  nomad 
life  which  most  of  the  tribes  continued  to  lead.  Arabia 
and  Syria  were  full  of  wandering  families,  who  lived  in 
tents  and  who  carried  about  with  them  the  secret  of  the 
fine  language  and  of  the  fundamental  ideas  of  their 
race.  Tent  life  is  that  which  gives  the  most  oppor- 
tunity and  spare  time  for  reflection  and  passion.  Amid 
a life  of  this  kind,  austere  and  stately,  there  emerged 
one  of  the  spirits  of  humanity,  one  of  the  forms  through 
which  the  genius,  which  assumes  bodily  shape  by  our 
nerves  and  muscles,  developed  into  expression  and  life. 
Judaism  (of  which  Christianity  is  but  a development) 
and  Islamism  have  their  roots  in  this  ancient  soil.  They 
were,  indeed,  fathers  of  the  faith,  these  chiefs  of  nomad 
clans,  wandering  through  the  desert,  staid,  honest  in 
their  own  fashion,  narrow-minded  no  doubt,  but 

D 


12 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


puritanic,  full  of  horror  for  pagan  impurities,  believing 
in  justice,  and  with  their  eyes  lifted  to  heaven.* 

Philosophy  and  science,  which  are  the  capital  crea- 
tions of  humanity,  could  not  spring  from  this  source  ; 
but  among  the  human  agglomerations  which  were  the 
first  to  conceive  sentiments  of  order  and  the  pride  which 
is  born  of  self-respect,  that  of  the  Semite  herders  must 
undoubtedly  rank  among  the  very  first.  The  Hebrew 
encampment  was,  to  the  same  extent  as  the  Aryan 
gard , a sort  of  asylum  of  refuge,  a virtuous  selection 
amidst  a world  of  violence,  like  the  Turan,  or  of  moral 
degradation,  as  were  Egypt,  and  probably  Assyria. 
Eeligion  had,  even  at  that  period,  a very  real  bearing 
upon  honest  living,  and  contributed  in  a certain  mea- 
sure to  morality. 

* The  main  document  upon  this  primitive  age  is  the  Book  of 
Genesis,  regarded  not  as  an  historical  work,  hut  as  the  idealistic 
description  of  an  age  which  really  existed.  A book  which  is  not 
historical  may  very  well  supply  a perfect  historical  picture  : as, 
for  instance,  the  Kitab-el-Aghani,  the  Homeric  poems.  The  con- 
firmation of  the  truthful  colouring  of  the  narratives  of  Genesis  is 
to  be  found  in  the  Book  of  Job,  in  the  paintings  in  the  Beni- 
Hassan  grottoes  in  Egypt,  and  especially  in  the  Arab  life  as  it 
exists  at  the  present  time.  The  life  which  the  Arabs  lead  now 
enables  us  to  study  the  patriarchal  society  of  antiquity  as  if  it 
were  still  in  existence.  The  type  of  this  society  is  so  unchange- 
able that  we  are  justified  in  drawing  conclusions  from  to-day  hack 
to  a period  of  four  or  five  thousand  years.  Islam  has  nothing  to 
do  with  the  characteristics  of  Arab  life,  having  exercised  very 
little  influence  upon  the  life  of  the  nomads.  The  tribes  who  roam 
about  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Mecca  are  scarcely  Mussulman  at 
all.  The  Kiiab-el-AgJiani , which  is  the  exact  image  of  Arab  life 
before  Mahomet,  depicts  scenes  quite  analogous  to  those  of  the 
ancient  Hebrew  narratives,  and  to  what  may  be  seen  in  our  own 
day  among  the  Bedouins  of  the  desert. 


THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


>3 


This  morality  was  obtained  at  the  cost  of  a startling 
simplicity  of  ideas.  The  liberty  of  the  individual, 
which  in  our  eyes  is  the  most  highly  prized  result  of 
civilisation,  did  not  exist.  Man  then  belonged  not  to 
himself  but  to  his  anthropological,  linguistic,  and 
religious  group.  Hone  of  those  great  emancipating 
facts  which,  by  breaking  up  the  too  narrow  framework 
of  the  nation,  render  the  individual  independent, 
no  great  fact  like  the  Greek  Civilisation,  the  Eoman 
Empire,  Christianity,  Islamism,  the  Eenaissance,  the 
Eeformation,  Philosophy,  or  the  Eevolution  had  yet 
burst  upon  the  world.  The  solidarity  of  the  tribe  was 
unbroken.  What  was  justice  for  one  was  justice  for 
the  other ; the  crime  of  the  one  was  visited  upon  his 
neighbour, * for  the  lot  of  the  individual  was  bound  up 
with  the  morality  of  the  whole  of  which  he  formed 
part.  Generations  existed  in  their  father  ; a tribe  was 
a man ; all  the  genealogies  which  were  preserved  by 
memory  were  conceived  in  this  style,  which  was  later 
the  cause  of  such  frequent  mistakes. 

With  us  responsibility  is  personal,  and  there  can 
be  no  crime  without  a criminal  intention.  A crime 
committed  unwittingly  is  an  accident  according  to  our 
ideas.  Abimelech,  Xing  of  Gerar,  would  not  have 
been  more  to  blame  if  he  had  not  discovered  Isaac’s 
stratagem,  j*  But  to  him  there  appeared  to  be  all  the 
difference  in  the  world.  He  would  have  committed 

* Genesis,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  23,  and  following.  Ezekiel  wae  the 
first  of  the  Hebrews  to  refute  this  grave  error. 

f Genesis,  ch.  xxvi. 

D 2 


i4  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


adultery  without  being  aware  of  it,  and  adultery  was 
an  inward  fire,  a disorder  which,  of  itself,  led  to  the 
ruin  and  extermination  of  families.*  Abimelech,  there- 
fore, might  well  say  to  Isaac,  “ What  is  this  that  thou 
wouldst  have  had  me  do?” 

These  nomad  tribes  would  form  groups,  numbering 
as  many  as  four  or  five  hundred  souls;  when  they 
became  more  numerous  than  that  they  interfered 
with  each  other  in  their  grazing,  and  a subdivision 
took  place;!  but  the  recollection  of  the  primitive 
relationship  was  preserved  for  centuries.  It  was  a 
rare  thing  for  the  tribe  to  be  reinforced  by  strangers. 
Great  store  was  set  by  purity  of  blood,  and  the 
prouder  of  the  chiefs  sent  sometimes  to  fetch  wives 
from  very  remote  regions,  whence  they  believed  their 
family  had  sprung  at  a remote  date.J  The  chief  of  the 
family,  or  patriarch, § embodied  in  himself  all  the  social 
institutions  of  the  time.  His  authority  was  absolute 
and  unquestioned ; he  had  no  need  of  agents  to  cause 
himself  to  be  respected.  Power  was  vested,  in  reality, 
in  the  tribe  as  a whole.  The  only  primitive  measures 
known  were  death  or  expulsion  from  the  tribe,  which 
amounted  to  pretty  much  the  same  thing. |J  Justice 

* Job,  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  11,  28. 

•f  Genesis,  ch.  xxxvi.,  v.  6,  7. 

I Genesis,  chs.  xxiv.,  xxvii.,  xxviii. 

§ This  word  is  not  met  with  before  the  first  century  of  our  era  ; 
but  it  is  a very  suitable  one,  so  I have  employed  it. 

||  The  penalty  of  hikkaret,  or  separation  from  the  tribe,  soon 
ended  in  death,  as  the  person  who  was  outlawed  had  no  longer 
any  protection.  See  for  a curious  illustration  of  this  practice 
among  the  Bedouins  of  our  day  Saulcy’s  Voyages,  vol.  i.  pp. 


THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


*5 

was  administered  by  the  assembly  of  elders.  The  code 
consisted  simply  in  the  application  of  the  lex  talionis. 
The  vengeance  of  blood,  which  was  exacted  as  a family 
duty,  sufficed  to  render  murder  almost  as  rare  as  it  has 
become  in  our  modern  societies  by  the  working  of 
institutions  far  more  complicated.  It  is  the  same  still 
in  Arabia,  where,  without  any  established  government, 
the  number  of  offences  against  the  person  is  not  greater 
than  it  is  with  us. 

There  were  not,  moreover,  any  external  signs  of 
power,  the  pivot  upon  which  the  society  of  that  day 
moved  being  respect.  The  road  to  supreme  power  lay 
neither  through  violence,  nor  the  popular  vote,  nor  the 
hereditary  principle,  nor  an  established  constitution. 
Authority  was  a self-evident  fact,  which  carried  the 
proof  of  it  upon  its  face.  Without  any  sort  of  military 
organisation,  without  priests  or  prophets,  some  of 
these  nomad  groups  thus  succeeded  in  realising  very 
perfect  societies  or  associations.  There  was  no  national 
existence,  but  thanks  to  the  solidarity  of  the  tribe  life 
and  property  were  fairly  secure. 

The  head  of  the  family  had  not,  as  a rule,  more 
than  one  regular  wife.  In  certain  cases,  nevertheless, 
the  patriarch  had  two  wives  of  equal  status  and  of 
noble  blood  ; often  two  sisters.*  This  regime  had  the 
usual  bad  results,  that  is  to  say,  unpleasantness  between 

291,  292.  The  hikkaret  is  in  force  among  the  republic  of  ants. 
The  ant  which  deviates  from  the  rules  of  the  community  is 
expelled,  and  soon  dies. 

* Kachel  and  Leah. 


1 6 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


brothers.  The  sons  of  the  same  mother  were  alone 
brothers  (amadelphi  or  adclphi , having  sucked  at  the 
same  breast).* * * §  The  patriarch  had,  besides,  for  concu- 
bines all  the  female  slaves  in  his  tent,  especially  those 
of  his  wife,  and  they  bore  him  children,  to  the  know- 
ledge and  often  at  the  request  of  his  wife.t  These  con- 
cubines’ children  had  not  rights  equal  to  those  of  the 
sons  of  well-born  wives,  though  they  at  the  same  time 
formed  part  and  parcel  of  the  family. 

The  privileges  of  primogeniture  as  between  the 
sons  of  the  well-born  wife  were  considerable^  In  case 
of  twins  being  born,  the  midwife  took  care  to  tie  a bit 
of  red  string  round  the  arm  of  the  first-born. § The 
eldest  born  was  the  head  of  the  family  ; the  father  as 
a rule  allotted  each  son  his  share.  His  blessing  carried 
its  own  weight  with  it,  like  one  of  the  sacraments  so 
to  speak,  even  when  there  wras  a mistake  as  to  the 
identity  of  the  person  blessed. ||  There  were  no  ille- 
gitimate children ; all  the  prostitutes  were  foreigners  ; 
the  guilty  woman  was  burnt  or  stoned,^}  and  the  fruit 
of  her  womb  destroyed  with  her ; if  the  child  was  born 
it  was  stoned  to  death.  Upon  the  other  hand,  the 
wife  had,  to  a certain  extent,  a right  to  bear  children.** 

* Genesis,  ck.  xliii.,  v.  29,  30. 

t History  of  Abrakam  and  Sarah. 

I Genesis,  ck.  xxvii. 

§ Genesis,  ck.  xxxviii.,  v.  27,  28. 

||  Esau,  Genesis,  ck.  xlviii. 

U Genesis,  ck.  xxxviii.,  v.  25. 

**  Genesis,  ck.  xxxviii.,  v.  8 and  the  following ; the  Book  of 
Ruth. 


THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


*7 


If  her  husband  died,  it  was  her  duty  to  appeal  to  her 
brother-in-law  or  to  some  member  of  her  husband’s 
family ; any  attempt  to  evade  this  duty  was  looked 
upon  as  a gross  offence.* 

Slavery  was,  and  has  remained,  one  of  the  necessi- 
ties of  the  life  which  these  tribes  led,  and  it  was  re- 
cruited by  inter-tribal  wars  or  by  purchase.  The  slave 
formed  part  of  the  family,  and  as  the  material  labour 
entailed  by  the  life  his  master  led  was  inconsiderable, 
the  lot  of  the  male  slave  was  not  at  all  a hard  one. 
The  male  slave  enjoyed  his  master’s  confidence,  and 
he  shared  all  the  sentiments  of  his  tribe.  With  his 
master’s  protection  overshadowing  him,  he  was  almost  as 
much  respected  as  the  latter.  The  female  slave,  upon  the 
contrary,  was  set  the  hardest  tasks,  such,  for  instance, 
as  the  grinding  at  the  mill  and  the  drawing  of 
water,  j* 

Although  they  did  not  inhabit  any  regularly-built 
towns,  the  nomad  Semites  did  not  pass  their  whole 
lives  wandering  from  one  pasturage  to  another.  The 
tribe  often  remained  for  a long  time  at  the  same  place, 
and  even  ran  up  hastily  built  houses,  such  as  may  be 
seen  in  the  present  day  in  the  poor  little  Syrian 
villages.  Houses  were  regarded  as  a gift  of  God,  who 
built  them  for  those  with  whom  He  was  well  pleased.^: 
There  is  an  abundance  of  broken  stones  over  all  the 

* Genesis,  ch.  xxxviii.,  v.  9.  The  explanation  generally  given 
distorts  the  nature  of  the  offence  here  referred  to. 

t Exodus,  ch.  xi.,  v.  5 ; Isaiah,  ch.  xlii.,  v.  2 ; Job,  ch.  xxi., 

V.  10. 

t Exodus,  ch.  i.,  v.  21: 


r8  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

surface  of  the  soil  of  Syria.  By  putting  these  together 
as  closely  as  they  will  go,  and  by  filling  up  the  inter- 
stices with  branches,  a shelter  is  obtained  which  those 
who  have  occupied  it  can  abandon  without  scruple 
when  the  tribe  moves  off  to  some  other  place.  The 
camels’-hair  tents,  secured  by  ropes,  must  have  been 
very  like  the  Arab  tents  of  the  present  day.  Of  course 
the  furniture  needed  in  a life  of  this  kind  was  very 
scanty,  being  confined  to  earthenware  vessels  and 
clothing,  while  almost  the  sole  luxury  consisted  of 
bracelets,  and  rings  for  the  noses  and  ears  of  the 
women.  A chased  dish  was  reserved  for  strangers  of 
distinction.* 

The  food  consisted  of  milk  and  meat.  In  the  course 
of  the  sojourn,  often  extending  over  several  years, 
which  was  made  in  the  same  place,  there  was  time 
to  sow  wheat  and  plant  vineyards.  As  a rule,  however, 
the  corn  and  wine  were  purchased  from  the  sedentary 
populations,  for  the  nomad  tribe  frequently  traversed 
regions  in  which  there  were  towns  and  resident  in- 
habitants. Contracts  and  bargains  were  then  made 
between  the  two.f  These  wealthy  tribes,  among 
whom  a principle  of  order  and  of  justice  prevailed,  were 
by  no  means  displeasing  to  the  resident  inhabitants, 
and  from  their  intercommunications  often  arose  alli- 
ances, and  even  marriage  proposals.^  The  herds  were 

* Judges,  ch.  v.,  v.  25. 

t Genesis,  ch.  xxxiv. 

X Genesis,  ch.  xxxiv.,  noting  at  the  same  time  the  difference 
between  the  two  combined  narratives.  According  to  the  Jehovist, 
Dinah  was  not  done  violence  to  ; she  was  merely  eloped  with. 


THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


*9 


formed  of  oxen,  ewes,  and  goats,  and  the  hcast  of 
burden  was  the  camel ; the  animal  used  for  riding,  the 
ass.  The  horse  appears  to  have  been  very  rarely  found 
am ona;  these  tribes.*  It  was  held  in  no  esteem  as  a 
beast  of  burden,  being  regarded  merely  as  an  animal 
to  be  employed  for  purposes  of  amusement,  or  as  a 
charger,  for  the  use  of  kings  and  warriors.  There 
were  no  wheeled  vehicles  of  any  kind. 

Intellectual  culture  did  not  exist,  not  at  least  as 
we  understand  it;  writing  was  unknown, f and  the 
requirements  of  these  simple  souls  were  very  few. 
But  tent  life,  bringing  as  it  does  individuals  into 
perpetual  communication  with  one  another,  and  afford- 
ing them  abundant  leisure,  is  a school  of  its  kind, 
especially  as  regards  elegant  diction  and  poetry.  The 
poetry  of  the  nomad  Semites  consisted  in  a sym- 
metrical partition  of  the  phrase  into  parallel  fractions 
and  in  the  use  of  picked  words.  Even  at  this  early 
period,  assuredly,  the  tribes  possessed  small  divans , 
composed  of  melodies  of  eight  or  ten  verses  relating 
to  the  incidents  of  their  nomad  life,  analogous  to  the 
Jasher  of  the  Israelites  and  to  the  Kitub-el-Aghdni  of 
the  Arabs. 

The  real  monuments  of  the  period  were,  as  is  the 
case  with  all  people  who  cannot  write,  the  stones 
which  they  reared,  the  columns  erected  in  memory  of 

* There  is  no  mention  of  the  horse  in  the  enumeration  of  the 
animals  which  constituted  the  fortune  of  Job. 

t The  signet  referred  to  (Genesis,  ch.  xxxviii.,  v.  18)  must  be  an 
anachronism  on  the  part  of  the  Jehovist  compiler. 


20 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


some  event,  and  upon  which  was  often  represented  a 
hand,  whence  the  name  of  iad or  heaps  of  stones, 
gal,  or  galgal, t the  “heaps  of  witness”  (( galeed ),t 
according  to  a custom  which  still  exists  in  the  East. 
The  name  of  these  heaps  was  a memorial  to  future 
generations. § Sometimes  large  trees  of  very  ancient 
growth  were  chosen  as  memorials. 

This  type  of  society,  which  has  survived  to  our  own 
day  among  the  Arab  tribes  which  have  escaped  any 
contamination  from  without,  is  too  incomplete  to 
have  made  much  advance  in  the  way  of  civilisation ; 
but  at  first  it  contributed  materially  to  the  foundation 
of  that  which  humanity  most  needed : honesty  and 
the  family  instinct.  In  a society  of  this  kind  young 
men  were  of  much  less  importance  than  wTith  the 
Greeks ; the  dominant  figure  was  the  elder,  the  sheik, 
who  was  the  depository  of  wisdom  and  power. 
The  type  of  perfection,  as  is  still  the  case  with  the 
Arabs,  was  the  staid,  well-born,  well-bred, ||  very 
courteous^  aristocrat,  who  took  a very  serious  view  of 
life,  and  avoided  all  contact  with  rough  and  coarse 

* Gesenius,  Thes.,  p.  568.  Synonyms  of  “p  and  of  CU7, 
Samuel,  booki.,  ck.  xv.,v.  12  ; ch.  xviii.,v.  18  ; Isaiah, ch.  lvi. , v.  5. 

t Galgal,  or  gilgal,  is  only  met  with  as  the  name  of  a place  ; but 
this  word  is  always  accompanied  by  the  definite  article  and 
associated  with  the  idea  of  ancient  and  idolatrous  worship. 

I Genesis,  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  45,  and  following. 

§ The  same  usage  prevailed  among  the  Touaregs,  down  almost 
to  our  own  day. 

||  Genesis,  ch.  xxiv. 

H Many  anecdotes  as  to  the  politeness  of  the  Arabs  will  occur  to 
the  reader. 


THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


21 


people.  The  outcome  of  all  this  was  an  essentially 
pacific  disposition,  something  which  was  at  once 
generous,  proud,  and  loyal,  a condition  of  mind 
denoting  persons  who  were  at  peace  with  themselves, 
who  were  prepared  to  defend  their  own  rights  and 
respect  those  of  others.  The  gradation  from  this  to  a 
carping,  litigious,  and  selfish  disposition  was  easy, 
and  craft  was,  as  a matter  of  fact,  esteemed  rather 
highly  in  this  ancient  world.*  Prudence  was  the 
first  of  virtues  ; untruthfulness  was  thought  little  of ; 
but  the  fear  of  a higher  power,  which  certain  crimes 
(murder  and  adultery)  irritated,  had  already  some 
effect.  Eeligion  implied  a rudimentary  moiul  code ; 
mysterious  forces  recompensed  good  deeds  in  a 
languid  and  intermittent  way  ; but  these  same  forces 
in  some  cases  visited  ill-deeds  with  punishment. 

It  was  in  this  way  of  viewing  religion  that  those 
pastoral  tribes  were  superior  to  all  the  peoples  of  their 
day ; and  it  is  on  this  account  that  they  occupy  the 
foremost  place  in  the  history  of  humanity. 

* Bead  the  whole  history  of  Jacob,  a masterpiece  of  ethno- 
graphical psychology.  Jacob  is  the  very  type  of  the  Aranrni 
obed  ^Deuteronomy,  ch.  xxvi.,  v.  5),  or  nomad  Semite, 


CHAPTER  III. 


RELIGIOUS  CALLING  OF  THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 

What  Greece  was  as  regards  intellectual  culture  and 
Rome  as  regards  politics,  the  nomad  Semites  were  as 
regards  religion.  It  was  by  means  of  religion  that 
these  worthy  pastoral  tribes  of  Syria  reached  an 
exceptional  position  in  the  world.  The  promises  made 
to  Abraham  are  mythical  only  in  form.  Abraham,  the 
imaginary  ancestor  of  these  tribes,  was  in  reality  the 
father  in  religion  of  all  peoples. 

Man  at  the  outset  of  his  progressive  life  was  in 
complete  ignorance,  and  almost  of  necessity  steeped 
in  error.  He  was  for  thousands  of  years  crazy 
after  having  been  for  thousands  of  years  an  animal. 
He  has  scarcely  even  now  emerged  from  childhood. 
Primitive  astronomy,  based  merely  upon  observation, 
was  but  a tissue  of  deceptions.  Thanks  to  a scien- 
tific development  continued  for  centuries,  man  has 
succeeded  in  detecting  the  errors  into  which  the  aspect 
of  the  firmament  had  caused  him  to  fall,  notably  tbs 
greatest  of  all,  viz.  that  the  earth  was  motionless.  In 
regard  to  the  moral  order  of  things,  the  truth  was 
much  more  difficult  to  discover,  and  a great  many 
human  brains  are  still  refractory  to  it.  At  first  man 


RELIGION  OF  THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


23 


imagined  space  to  be  peopled  with  free  and  passionate 
forces,  open  to  be  invoked  and  moved  from  their 
purposes.  He  created  a divine  world  in  his  own 
image,  and  treated  tbe  gods  of  it  as  he  liked  to  be 
treated  by  his  inferiors.  There  was  an  exchange  of 
politeness  between  trembling  man  and  the  potent 
forces  by  which  he  believed  himself  to  be  surrounded. 
A constant  course  of  experience,  confirmed  by  ex^ot 
science,  has  proved  to  us  that  this  primitive  hypothesis 
of  free  causes  quite  independent  of  us  is  altogether 
erroneous.  Ho  signs  have  been  discovered  in  nature 
of  any  intelligent  agent  superior  to  man.  Hature  is 
inexorable ; its  laws  are  blind.  Prayer  never  encoun- 
ters any  being  that  it  can  turn  from  its  purpose.  Ho 
prayer  or  aspiration  has  ever  healed  a disease  or  won 
a battle.  Put,  in  order  to  reach  this  truth,  of  which 
the  learned  men  of  Babylon  perhaps  caught  a glimpse, 
and  which  the  Greek  philosophers  saw  to  perfection 
as  far  back  as  500  b.c.,  it  was  necessary  that  whole 
generations  of  learned  men  should  combine  their 
efforts.  What  sort  of  idea  could  they  form  of  wind 
who  had  no  notion  as  to  the  real  existence  of  the  air  ? 
The  nature  of  thunder  was  only  discovered  about  a 
century  ago  ; how,  then,  could  primitive  man  see  in  it 
aught  else  but  the  explosion  of  the  wrath  of  an  all- 
powerful  being,  dwelling  in  the  clouds  and  on  the 
summits  of  the  mountains  ? The  sea,  the  water- 
courses, and  the  springs,  having  an  individuality  of 
their  own,  and  acting  as  persons  (we  still  speak  of  the 
sea  as  being  angry,  a spring  as  being  beneficent,  and 


24  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

water  as  asleep),  almost  necessarily  became  personified. 
Birth,  disease,  death,  delirium,  a trance,  sleep  and 
dreams  made  a deep  effect  upon  the  popular  mind,  as 
they  still  do,  and  there  are  but  a few  who  see  that 
these  phenomena  have  their  rise  in  our  own  organisa- 
tion. The  course  of  human  affilirs  gave  rise  to  even 
more  erroneous  judgments.  Accidents,  good  or  bad 
luck,  the  bearing  of  children  or  sterility,  wealth, 
success,  ascendancy,  and  authority,  were  interpreted 
as  favours  accorded  to  man  by  superior  beings,  or  as 
humiliations  more  or  less  capable  of  being  warded  off. 

Terror,  panic,  and  lack  of  self-possession  were  the 
consequences  of  this  very  erroneous  system  of  nature, 
and  the  adage,  “Primus  in  orbe  deos  fecit  timor,”  is 
true  to  the  letter.  Man  believed  himself  to  be  sur- 
rounded by  enemies  whom  he  endeavoured  to  appease. 
As  his  senses  were  scarcely  at  all  developed,  he  was 
the  dupe  of  constant  hallucinations.  An  unexpected 
breath  of  wind,  a sudden  sound,  were  regarded  by  him 
as  tokens.  An  exaggerated  spiritualism  led  him  to 
look  for  spirits  everywhere,  invisible  beings,  shadows 
or  doubles  of  real  things,*  which  pursued  him  wher- 
ever he  went  and  became  confounded  in  his  mind  with 
the  subjective  phenomena  he  was  conscious  of.  The 
type  of  such  an  existence  as  this  is  to  be  seen,  or 
at  any  rate  might  have  been  studied  a few  years  ago, 
in  the  Maidive  Islands  for  one  place.  The  natives  of 
these  poverty-stricken  islets  barricaded  themselves  in 

* Reville’s  Religion  des  peoples  non  civilises,  vol.  i.  pp.  67  and 
following,  pp.  228  and  following ; vol.  ii.  pp.  89  and  following. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  NOMAD  SEMITES . 


25 


their  huts  of  a night,  believing  that  in  the  darkness 
the  air  was  full  of  evil  spirits  whom  they  could  hear 
fluttering  about.  The  dread  of  darkness  and  other 
unreasoning  fears,  which  are  still  very  great  among 
certain  races  of  men,  as,  for  instance,  in  Brittany,  are 
the  reduced  remnants  of  what  was  originally  a fact 
of  the  first  importance. 

Like  all  the  ancient  peoples  in  history,  the  nomad 
Semite  believed  that  he  was  living  amid  a supernatural 
environment.  The  world,  as  he  imagined,  was  sur- 
rounded, penetrated,  and  governed  by  the  Elohim , by 
myriads  of  active  beings  very  analogous  to  the 
11  spirits  ” of  the  savages,  full  of  life,  translucid, 
inseparable  in  a way  from  one  another,  with  no 
distinct  proper  names  like  the  Aryan  gods,  so  that  it 
was  difficult  not  to  regard  them  as  a whole  and  con- 
found them  all  together.  The  old  Greek  polytheism 
or  that  of  our  time  is  not  proved  by  the  use  of  the 
plural  dii,  but  by  the  separate  names  of  Zeus,  Hermes, 
&c.  One  Eloh  has  no  name  to  distinguish  him  from 
another  Eloh , so  that  all  of  them  united  act  as  one 
single  being,  and  that  the  word  Elohim  is  construed 
with  the  verb  in  the  singular.* 

Elohim  is  everywhere ; his  breath  is  universal  life  ; 
through  Elohim  everything  lives.  Whatever  happens 
is  his  (or  their)  work.  He  brings  children  into  exist- 
ence ; he  causes  women  to  be  fruitful ; -J*  he  slays ; he 

* It  was  the  same  with  with  the  Phoenicians.  Corpus 

inscr.  semit.,  1st  part,  pp.  6,  146.  For  other  facts  of  a similar  kind 
see  Journal  asiatique,  Feb.-March,  1859,  pp.  218,  and  following. 

f Genesis,  ch.  xxx.,  v.  2,  22;  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  5. 


*6  HIS  TOR  F OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 

(or  they)  is  heard  in  the  sounds  which  cannot  be  ex- 
plained ; he  (or  they)  breathes  forth  terror.*  The 
atmospheric  phenomena,  more  especially,  are  his  (or 
their)  work.  lie  is  the  subject  of  verbs  which  are  as 
a rule  impersonal : u He  thunders,  he  rains.”  j*  The 
crash  of  the  thunder  is  his  voice,  the  lightning  is  his 
light ; whatever  is  great  or  extraordinary  is  ascribed 
to  him. 

A very  characteristic  usage  of  Semitic  monotheism 
is  derived  from  this,  — namely,  the  habit  of  desig- 
nating Elohim  merely  by  the  pronoun  of  the  third 
person.  When  this  was  done  it  was  usual  to  pro- 
nounce the  pronoun  very  emphatically,  accompanied 
by  a gesture  heavenwards.  The  name  of  God  thus 
became  a kind  of  grammatical  element  of  the  Semitic 
languages,  the  perpetual  subject,  which  there  was  no 
need  to  express  in  speech.  £ 

The  proper  names  bore  evidence  of  this  pious  cus- 
tom, names  such  as  Abihou  (He  is  my  father),  Elihou 
(He  is  my  God),  Abdo  (the  servant  of  Him),  Davdo 
(the  favourite  of  Him),  Hanno  (the  grace  of  Him); 
names  which  became  by  abbreviation  Aid  or  Obed, 
David , Hanan , &c.§  Man,  as  well  as  nature,  was  under 

* Genesis,  ch.  xxxv.,  v.  5 ; Joshua,  ch.  x.,  v.  10. 

t Comp.  [Zeus]  veL 

J This  occurs  very  frequently  in  the  Book  of  Job,  where  God  is 
frequently  spoken  of  without  any  direct  reference.  See,  for  an 
instance  of  this,  ch.  xii.,  v.  13  and  following;  ch.  xxiii.,  v.  3 ; 
and  particularly  the  last  speech  of  Bildad  (ch.  xxv.,  v.  2 and 
following). 

§ See  Mem.  upon  the  abbreviated  theophoric  names,  in  the 
Revue  des  etudes  juives,  Oct.-Dec.,  1882. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


27 


the  immediate  dependence  of  Eloliim  or  of  the  elokim. 
Whatever  befell  him  in  the  way  of  good  or  evil,  un- 
expected catastrophes,  or  sudden  death,  came  from  on 
high.  ITeaven  killed  the  wicked  man,  and  was  the 
general  upholder  of  order  in  the  universe.  No  doubt 
this  Eloliim  of  doubtful  identity  is  still  far  removed 
from  the  just  and  moral  God  of  the  prophets  ; but  one 
can  see  that  he  will  in  due  course  become  so,  whereas 
Yarouna,  Zeus,  and  Diespiter  will  never  succeed  in 
becoming  honest  and  just,  and  will  eventually  be  aban- 
doned by  those  who  worship  them. 

It  would  be  a great  exaggeration  to  trace  back  to 
a very  remote  antiquity  the  purified  and  clear  beliefs 
of  philosophical  spiritualism.  The  unity  of  causes 
■was,  to  these  perplexed  consciences,  no  more  than  the 
indivisibility  of  causes.  When  we  have  unravelled 
as  far  as  possible  the  confusion  of  ideas  which  were 
mixed  up  in  primitive  psychology,  we  find  that  the 
prayer  of  the  terrified  human  being  of  those  times 
found  utterance  in  two  forms  of  theology  differing 
the  one  from  the  other.  The  Aryan  when  in  peril 
addressed  himself  to  the  element  which  threatened 
danger  or  to  the  god  which  ruled  this  element.  When 
at  sea  he  invoked  Poseidon  or  Neptune  ; when  sick 
he  made  his  vows  to  Asclepios ; while  he  prayed  to 
Demeter  or  Ceres  for  an  abundant  harvest.  The  Gauls 
had  almost  as  many  minor  gods  as  there  were  medical 
or  veterinary  specialities.  The  number  of  these  gods 
consequently  became  enormous,  and  each  of  them  had 
a distinct  name  of  his  own.  The  Semite,  upon  the 


23  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

contrary,  always  invokes  one  and  the  same  Being; 
whether  at  sea,  or  in  battle,  or  in  dread  of  a storm,  or 
smitten  with  disease,  his  prayer  goes  up  to  the  same 
God.  One  sovereign  ruled  over  all  things,  but  this 
sovereign  bore  different  names  in  different  tribes.  In 
some  cases  he  was  called  E l , or  A Ion,  or  Eloah ; in  other 
cases  Elion , Sadden,  Baal , Adona'i , Ram , Milik  or 
Moloch .*  But  all  these  names  in  reality  have  the  same 
meaning ; they  are  nearly  all  of  them  synonymous ; they 
all  signify  “the  Lord,”  or  “the  Most  High,”  or  “the 
Almighty they  mark  some  special  excellence.  They 
no  more  imply  distinct  individualities  than  do  the 
different  names  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  Notre  Dame  de 
Carmel , Notre  Dame  de  Bon  Secours , Notre  Dame  du 
Pilier  in  Catholic  countries.  They  are  different  words, 
not  different  gods.f  Everywhere  we  find  that  it  is  the 
supreme  master  of  the  universe  who  is  adored  under 
these  names  in  appearance  so  different.  No  doubt  this 
notion  of  a supreme  God  was  very  vague,  and  in  no 
wise  resembled  the  symbols  of  the  Jew  and  the  Mus- 
sulman. The  usages  of  scholastic  theology  which  we 
have  had  inculcated  on  us  by  the  catechism  had  no 
existence  for  brains  which  were  incapable  of  seizing 
any  dogma.  The  elohim,  which  were  generally  bound 
together,  sometimes  exercised  an  isolated  action. 

* See  my  essay  on  the  primitive  monotheism  of  the  Semitic 
peoples,  in  the  Journal  asiatique,  Feb. -March.,  March-April, 
1859. 

t Compare  the  names  of  the  temples  at  Sidon,  Maita,  Carthage, 
Corpus  inscr.  semit.,  part  i.,  Nos.  8,  132,  247,  248,  249,  250, 
255. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


29 


They  never  were  in  opposition  with  one  another ; 
but,  like  the  angels  of  a much  more  modern  mytho- 
logy, they  often  exercised  different  functions.  Thus 
each  tribe  had  its  protecting  god,  whose  function  it 
was  to  watch  over  it,  direct  it,  and  promote  its  suc- 
cess in  every  one  of  its  enterprises.  We  shall  find 
the  Beni -Israel  attaching  themselves,  like  all  the 
ancient  tribes,  to  this  narrow  idea,  and  their  god 
becoming,  in  order  to  protect  the  tribe  of  his  choice, 
the  most  unjust  and  jealous  of  gods.  The  god  of  the 
tribe  followed  the  individual  even  when  he  left  his 
tribe,  and  continued  to  be  his  god  when  he  was  upon 
the  territory  of  strange  gods.* * * §  There  was  some  ana- 
logy between  this  and  the  personified  Fortuna  of  the 
Roman  families, j*  and,  as  a matter  of  fact,  the  pro- 
tecting gods  were  often  called  by  the  name  of  Gad 
(Fortune).*  In  this  way  the  god  was  identified 
with  the  tribe,  and  the  victories  and  defeats  of  the 
tribe  were  his  own  defeats  and  victories.  If  defeated, 
he  was  subjected  to  the  insults  of  the  conqueror,  and 
no  distinction  was  made  between  his  name  and  that  of 
the  tribe.  § 

* Te'ima  Inscription  in  the  Louvre,  Noeldeke,  Altaram.  In- 
schriften,  Berlin,  1884.  Revue  d' arch,  orientate,  1885,  pp.  41  and 
following. 

f Orelli-Henzen,  No.  1769.  Cf.  No.  5787  and  Corpus  inscr. 
gr.,  No.  2693  b. 

f Such  as  the  Fortuna  of  Taym,  at  Palmyra.  Comptes  rendus 
de  VAcademie  des  Inscriptions  et  Belles-Lettres,  April  2,  1869. 

§ Inscription  of  Mesa,  lines  12,  13,  18.  The  title  of  book 
mrp  manba ; the  song  of  Heshbon,  Numbers,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  29. 

E 2 


3° 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


The  god  of  the  tribe  was  followed  by  the  local  god 
presiding  over  a province,  having  his  fixed  dwelling- 
place  and  often  his  sanctuary  (a  column,  an  altar,  a high 
place)  at  a given  spot ; * * * § very  powerful  in  his  own 
region,  so  much  so  that  those  who  were  passing 
through  it  deemed  it  necessary  to  render  him  homage, 
if  only  to  deter  him  from  doing  them  a bad  turn.j*  A 
very  common  expression  among  the  nomads  at  a cer- 
tain epoch — the  Salm,  or  the  Baal,  or  the  Moloch  of 
such  and  such  a place* — to  designate  the  central  point 
of  a worship — was  not  perhaps  as  yet  employed,  but 
the  people  were  coming  to  it.  J acob  saw  in  his  dream 
“ the  God  of  Bethel.”  § lie  did  homage  to  the  place 
where  he  had  his  dream  by  erecting  a pillar  there,  and 
pouring  oil  upon  the  top  of  it.  ||  Thus  the  holy  place 
dates  from  the  utmost  antiquity  of  Semitic  worship. 

The  consequence  of  all  this  was  a certain  religious 
eclecticism,  of  which  we  have  the  type  in  the  priceless 
inscription  discovered  at  Teima,  in  the  centre  of 
Arabia.^}  Salmsezab,  the  author  of  this  inscription, 

* Te'ima  Inscription  (see  the  preceding  page). 

t Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  25  and  following. 

+ Teima  Inscription.  This  form  is  very  common  in  Aramaic 
epigraphy.  See  Corpus  inscr.  semit.,  part  i.,  183,  365,  366; 
Constantine,  Costa,  12  ; Inscription  d’Altiburos  ( Journal  asiatique, 
April- June,  1887);  de  Vogue,  Si/rie  Centrale.  Inscriptions  semi- 
tiques,  pp.  107 — 111.  Compare  Jeremiah,  ch.  li. , v.  44. 

§ Genesis,  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  13,  bSTT'n  bsn.  For  the  gram- 
matical question  see  Gesenius,  Lehrg.,  pp.  657,  658. 

||  Genesis,  ch.  xxviii.,  v.  18,  and  following. 

" Revued  arch,  orient .,  l.c.  Compare  the  curious  Sabean  inscrip- 


RELIGION  OF  THE  NOMAD  SEMITES.  31 

not.  only  stipulates  for  his  right  to  sacrifice  in  foreign 
lands  to  his  own  god,  whose  priest  he  is,  and  whose 
name  is  embodied  in  his  own  ; hut  he  desires  that  the 
gods  of  these  foreign  countries,  whose  power  he  ac- 
knowledges, shall  find  pleasure  in  the  sacrifices  which  he 
is  about  to  offer  to  his  own  god,  and  shall  regard  these 
sacrifices  as  being  offered  to  themselves.  More  than 
that,  he  desires  that  the  holy  place  consecrated  to  his 
god  may  he  under  the  protection  of  the  gods  of  Teima, 
and  he  founds  upon  foreign  soil  the  worship  of  his  own 
personal  god,  and  sets  apart,  out  of  what  we  may  call 
the  public  worship  fund  of  the  country  where  he  is,  a 
fixed  sum  (in  palm-trees)  for  the  worship  of  his 
personal  god.  The  gods  of  Teima  accept  this  singular 
bargain,  become  guarantors  for  it,  and  grant  their  pro- 
tection to  Salmsezab.  Jacob  is  not  less  simple  in  what 
he  did  at  Bethel,  for  we  read  in  Genesis  (ch.  xxviii., 
v.  20-22),  “ If  Iahveh  will  be  with  me,  and  will 
keep  me  in  this  way  that  I go,  and  will  give  me  bread 
to  eat,  and  raiment  to  put  on,  so  that  I come  again  to 
my  father’s  house  in  peace  : then  shall  Iahveh  be  my 
God;  and  this  stone,  which  I have  set  for  a pillar, 
shall  be  God’s  house ; and  of  all  that  thou  shalt  give 
me,  I will  surely  give  the  tenth  unto  thee.” 

Facts  of  this  kind  must  have  been  common  at  the 
time  when  the  Semitic  nomad  tribes  were  divided 
between  the  worship  of  the  family  gods  and  the  wor- 
ship of  the  provincial  gods,  having  a more  or  less 

tion  of  Medain-Salih,  No.  29  (D.  H.  Muller,  (Est.  Monatsschrift 
fur  den  Orient,  November,  1884,  p.  279). 


32 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


territorial  jurisdiction.  Buth,  the  Moabite,  upon 
reaching  Israelitish  soil,  adopted  outright  the  god  of 
Israel ; hut  heads  of  families  and  persons  of  impor- 
tance were  doubtless  more  particular,  and  this  must 
often  have  given  rise  to  rather  complicated  bargains. 
It  is  very  possible  that  during  the  reign  of  Solomon 
several  conventions  of  this  kind  were  made  at  Jeru- 
salem, and  it  may  be  that  in  the  very  temple  of 
Solomon  Tyrians  sacrificed  to  Baal,  upon  the  assump- 
tion that  these  sacrifices  were  not  displeasing  to 
Iahveh. 

These  individual  selections,  this  particularising  of 
the  divine  nation,  so  contrary  to  the  idea  which  the 
Semites  ultimately  propagated  through  Judaism  and 
Islamism,  did  not  prevent  the  Elohim  who  were 
grouped  in  dii  consentes  from  forming  a superior 
power  which  inspired  universal  dread.  The  men  of 
every  tribe  recognised  their  supreme  authority,  and 
stood  in  awe  of  them.  They  were  supposed  to  be 
capable  of  punishing  crimes  which  would  never  be 
known  to  men  so  much  so  that  the  fear  of  elohim 
(or  of  Elohim)  prevented  many  evil  deeds.  They  saw 
everything,  being  scattered  over  all  the  earth,  and 
they  therefore  had  knowledge  of  and  traced  out  a 
host  of  misdeeds,  which  escaped  human  justice.  They 
thus  constituted  a sort  of  secret  tribunal.  The  acci- 
dents without  any  apparent  cause,  the  maladies,  the 
sudden  deaths  and  other  disasters,  were  regarded  as 
the  acts  of  justice  done  by  the  Elohim.  The  word 
* Genesis,  ch.  xx.,  v.  11. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


33 


yirea,  “fear,”  inferring  as  it  did  an  unknown 
world  behind  it,  was  synonymous  with  “ piety.”* 
The  commission  of  a crime  entailed  a constant 
apprehension  of  what  the  elohim  might  do.j*  To 
fear  God  was  to  believe  in  the  reality  of  the  moral 
sense ; a man  who  feared  God  was  a conscientious 
man. 

Sometimes  the  elohim  were  called  Beni- Elohim , “the 
sons  of  the  gods,  the  divine  race.”  "When  the  elohim 
became  a single  being,  of  definite  individuality,  the 
Beni-Eloliim  became  his  host,  a great  body  of  angels,  in 
perfect  communion  with  him,  coming  now  and  then 
before  him  to  do  him  worship.^  Some  of  them  had 
personal  duties  assigned  to  them,  especially  Satan,  or  the 
detractor,  who  was  engaged  in  finding  fault  with  the 
universe,  while  the  true  children  of  God  could  see  only 
its  harmonies.  But  it  took  centuries  to  establish  any 
sort  of  order  or  hierarchy  in  this  divine  chaos. 

Such  a conception,  to  which  our  formularies  have  as 
a matter  of  course  given  a consistency  which  it  did  not 
before  possess,  was  very  superior  to  that  which  there  are 
good  grounds  for  attributing  to  the  Aryans,  not  but  what 
Semitic  theology  is  infinitely  removed  from  that  which 
positive  science  has  caused  to  prevail.  If  science  has 
driven  from  the  world  the  special  and  the  local  gods, 
it  has  not  in  any  way  given  a helping  hand  to  the 
hypothesis  of  a single  providence,  concerning  itself  in 

* Job,  ch.  iv.,  v.  6 ; ch.  xv.,  v.  4. 
t Genesis,  ch.  xlii.,  v.  28. 

Job,  ch.  i.,  v.  6 ; compare  Genesis,  ch.  vi.,  v.  1 and  following. 


3z  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

territorial  jurisdiction.  Ruth,  the  Moabite,  upon 
reaching  Israelitish  soil,  adopted  outright  the  god  of 
Israel ; but  heads  of  families  and  persons  of  impor- 
tance were  doubtless  more  particular,  and  this  must 
often  have  given  rise  to  rather  complicated  bargains. 
It  is  very  possible  that  during  the  reign  of  Solomon 
several  conventions  of  this  kind  were  made  at  J eru- 
salem,  and  it  may  be  that  in  the  very  temple  of 
Solomon  Tyrians  sacrificed  to  Baal,  upon  the  assump- 
tion that  these  sacrifices  were  not  displeasing  to 
Iahveh. 

These  individual  selections,  this  particularising  of 
the  divine  nation,  so  contrary  to  the  idea  which  the 
Semites  ultimately  propagated  through  Judaism  and 
Islamism,  did  not  prevent  the  Elohim  who  were 
grouped  in  dii  consentes  from  forming  a superior 
power  which  inspired  universal  dread.  The  men  of 
every  tribe  recognised  their  supreme  authority,  and 
stood  in  awe  of  them.  They  were  supposed  to  be 
capable  of  punishing  crimes  which  would  never  be 
known  to  men  ;*  so  much  so  that  the  fear  of  elohim 
(or  of  Elohim)  prevented  many  evil  deeds.  They  saw 
everything,  being  scattered  over  all  the  earth,  and 
they  therefore  had  knowledge  of  and  traced  out  a 
host  of  misdeeds,  which  escaped  human  justice.  They 
thus  constituted  a sort  of  secret  tribunal.  The  acci- 
dents without  any  apparent  cause,  the  maladies,  the 
sudden  deaths  and  other  disasters,  were  regarded  as 
the  acts  of  justice  done  by  the  Elohim.  The  word 
* Genesis,  ch.  xx.,  v.  11. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


33 


yirea , “fear,”  inferring  as  it  did  an  unknown 
world  behind  it,  was  synonymous  with  “ piety.”* 
The  commission  of  a crime  entailed  a constant 
apprehension  of  what  the  elohim  might  do.*]*  To 
fear  God  was  to  believe  in  the  reality  of  the  moral 
sense ; a man  who  feared  God  was  a conscientious 
man. 

Sometimes  the  elohim  were  called  Beni- Elohim,  “the 
sons  of  the  gods,  the  divine  race.”  When  the  elohim 
became  a single  being,  of  definite  individuality,  the 
Beni- Elohim  became  his  host,  a great  body  of  angels,  in 
perfect  communion  with  him,  coming  now  and  then 
before  him  to  do  him  worship.  J Some  of  them  had 
personal  duties  assigned  to  them,  especially  Satan,  or  the 
detractor,  who  was  engaged  in  finding  fault  with  the 
universe,  while  the  true  children  of  God  could  see  only 
its  harmonies.  But  it  took  centuries  to  establish  any 
sort  of  order  or  hierarchy  in  this  divine  chaos. 

Such  a conception,  to  which  our  formularies  have  as 
a matter  of  course  given  a consistency  which  it  did  not 
before  possess,  was  very  superior  to  that  which  there  are 
good  grounds  for  attributing  to  the  Aryans,  not  but  what 
Semitic  theology  is  infinitely  removed  from  that  which 
positive  science  has  caused  to  prevail.  If  science  has 
driven  from  the  world  the  special  and  the  local  gods, 
it  has  not  in  any  way  given  a helping  hand  to  the 
hypothesis  of  a single  providence,  concerning  itself  in 

* Job,  ch.  iv.,  v.  6 ; ch.  xv.,  v.  4. 

t Genesis,  ch.  xlii.,  v.  28. 

X Job,  ch.  i.,  v.  6 ; compare  Genesis,  ch.  vi.,  v.  1 and  following. 


3 6 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

between  that  which  was  due  to  the  primitive  gifts  of 
the  race  and  that  which  the  incidents  of  history  have 
grafted  on  to  them.  The  causes  of  Semitic  mono- 
theism were  more  compound  than  simple,  and  it  will 
probably  be  safe  to  attribute  a larger  share  to  the 
habits  of  a nomad  life  than  to  the  influence  of  blood. 
For,  upon  the  one  hand,  peoples  who  have  nothing 
Semitic  about  them,  but  who  lead  a life  analogous  to 
that  of  the  nomad  Semites,  such  as  the  Kirghiz,  or  the 
present  inhabitants  of  the  upper  basin  of  the  White 
Nile,  resemble  very  closely  the  ancient  patriarchs  of 
the  desert.  Upon  the  other  hand,  the  Himyarites 
and  Assyrians  of  the  second  age,  who,  at  all  events 
so  far  as  language  is  concerned,  are  thoroughly 
Semitic,  do  not  exhibit  the  religious  puritanism  found 
in  the  nomad  Semites.  It  appears  then  that  tent  life 
was  the  main  factor  in  the  selection  of  the  religious 
aristocracy  which  destroyed  paganism  and  converted 
the  world  to  monotheism.  The  roots  of  this  great  fact 
go  deep  down  into  the  soil  of  ancient  history.  The 
tent  of  the  Semite  patriarch  was  the  starting  point  of 
the  religious  progress  of  humanity. 

It  may  be  said  of  the  nomad  that  he  is  at  once  the 
most  and  the  least  religious  of  men.  His  faith  is  the 
firmest  that  there  is ; twice  it  has  conquered  the 
world,  and  yet,  to  judge  from  externals,  it  would  seem 
as  if  his  religion  was  a sort  of  minimum , a quintessence, 
a residue,  a congeries  of  negative  precautions.  Worship 
holds  but  a very  small  place  in  the  life  of  the  nomad ; 
a superficial  observer  is  tempted  to  regard  this  proud 


RELIGION  OF  THE  NOMAD  SEMITES. 


37 


vagrant  as  being  indifferent,  not  to  say  sceptical.* 
His  mode  of  life  made  it  impossible  for  him  to  have 
statues  and  temples.  His  gallant  bearing  and  instincts 
inspired  him  with  a horror  of  superstition  and  abject 
practices.  His  philosophic  reflection,  pursued  with 
intensity  in  a narrow  circle  of  observation,  imparted  to 
him  very  simple  ideas,  and  as  it  is  the  nature  of  reli- 
gious progress  always  to  simplify,  the  immediate  result 
was  that  the  religion  of  the  nomad  became  more  intense 
than  that  of  peoples  more  civilised  than  himself.  The 
nomad  Semite  was  a Protestant,  and  many  of  the 
populations  which  adopted  Protestantism  about  the 
sixteenth  century  were  far  from  equalling  in  intellec- 
tual culture  the  Italy  of  the  time  of  Leo  X.  Religious 
servility  was  repulsive  to  them  ; and  this  fine  feeling 
afterwards  brought  its  reward,  and  has  been  placed  to 
their  credit. 

* Such  is  essentially  the  character  of  the  nomad  Arab.  I have 
dwelt  upon  this  in  detail  in  my  Melanges  d'ldstoires  et  de  voyages, 
pp.  305  and  following. 


434616 


CHAPTER  IY. 


MONOTHEISM,  ABSENCE  OF  MYTHOLOGY. 

"With  a certain  type  of  language  of  its  own,  the 
Semitic,  like  the  Aryan,  seems,  as  we  see,  to  have  at 
first  had  for  its  common  sliare  a certain  type  of  reli- 
gion. The  fundamental  idea  of  this  religion  was  the 
supremacy  of  one  common  master  in  heaven  and  earth. 
All  this  remained  very  vague  and  confused  up  to  the 
ninth  century  b.c.,  but  it  was,  none  the  less,  in  the 
germ  from  the  very  first,  and  was  due  mainly,  as  I 
have  said,  to  the  character  of  the  nomad  life  which 
impresses  upon  all  races  without  distinction  so  deep  a 
mark.  One  very  decisive  proof  of  this  was  the  little 
liking  which  nomads  as  a rule  have  for  figures  in 
painting  or  sculpture.  A nation  which  has  figured 
presentments  before  it  almost  infallibly  becomes  idola- 
trous. The  interdict  placed  upon  them  by  the  Hebrew 
legislators  may  be  said  to  have  been  imposed  upon  the 
nomcds  by  the  very  laws  of  their  existence.  Homad 
life  made  impossible  the  paraphernalia  necessary  for 
an  idolatrous  worship ; the  pantheon  must  be  as  port- 
able as  the  douar,  and  the  Pedouin’s  habits  limited 
him  to  a few  insignificant  teraphim , and  a portable  ark 
in  which  the  sacred  objects  were  enclosed. 


MONOTHEISM , ABSENCE  OF  MYTHOLOGY.  39 


What  was  wanting  in  the  Semite  far  more  even  than 
a taste  for  the  plastic  arts  was  mythology,  * which,  quite 
as  much  as  painting  and  sculpture,  is  the  mother  of 
polytheism.  The  principle  of  mythology  is  the  invest- 
ing of  words  with  life  ; whereas  the  Semitic  languages 
do  not  readily  lend  themselves  to  personifications  of 
this  kind.  A feature  in  the  peoples  who  speak  them 
is  a want  of  fertility  both  of  imagination  and  language. 
Each  word  was  to  the  primitive  Aryan  pregnant,  if  I 
may  so  speak,  and  comprised  within  itself  a potential 
myth.  The  subject  of  such  phrases  as,  “ Death  struck 
him  down,”  “a  malady  carried  him  off,”  “the  thunder 
roars,”  “ it  rains,”  &c.,  was,  in  his  eyes,  a being  doing 
in  reality  the  deed  expressed  by  the  verb.  In  the 
eyes  of  the  Semite,  upon  the  contrary,  all  the  facts  the 
cause  of  which  is  unknown  have  one  same  cause.  All 
phenomena,  more  especially  those  of  meteorology, 
which  had  so  deep  an  interest  for  primitive  peoples, 
were  ascribed  to  the  same  being.  In  regard  to  life, 
the  same  breath  animated  all  things.  The  thunder 
was  the  voice  of  God ; the  lightning  was  his  light ; 
the  storm  cloud  his  veil ; hail  the  missiles  of  his 
wrath.  Rain,  in  all  the  primitive  mythologies  of  the 
Indo-European  race,  is  represented  as  the  fruit  of  the 
union  of  heaven  and  earth.  In  the  Rook  of  Job,  which 
is  the  expression  of  a very  ancient  theology,  it  is  God 
who  opens  the  windows  of  heaven,  who  has  “ divided 
the  water-courses  for  the  overflowing  of  waters,”  and 

* See  Journal  asiatique,  April-May,  1859,  pp.  426  and  follow- 
ing. 


40  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

“hath  begotten  the  drops  of  dew.”*  Aurora,  in  the 
Aryan  mythologies,  is  the  object  of  an  extraordinary 
number  of  myths,  in  which  she  is  assigned  a personal 
part  and  assumes  many  different  names.  She  is  the 
daughter  of  Night;  she  is  espoused  by  the  Sun;  she 
begets  Tithonus,  or  the  Day ; she  loves  Kephalos  (the 
large  head,  the  Sun) ; she  has  for  her  rival  Procris  (the 
Dew) ; she  flies  from  the  pursuit  of  the  Sun,  and  is 
destroyed  by  his  embrace.  In  the  Book  of  Job,  upon 
the  contrary,  God  commands  the  morning,  makes  the 
stars  rise  or  set,  and  appoints  to  light  and  darkness 
their  respective  bounds.! 

Nearly  all  the  roots  of  the  Aryan  languages  thus 
contained  a concealed  divinity,  whereas  the  Semitic 
roots  are  dry,  inorganic,  and  quite  incapable  of  giving 
birth  to  a mythology.  When  one  fully  realises  the 
power  of  the  root  div,  designating  the  brightness  of 
the  clear  sky,  one  can  readily  understand  how  from 
this  root  have  come  dies,  divum  (sub  dio),  Devci , Zeus , 
Jupiter , Diespiter,  and  Diciuspiter.  The  words  Agni 
(ignis),  Vanina  (Ovpavos),  Gc.  or  De  (A^/x^r^p),  also 
contained  the  germ  of  individualities  which,  becoming 
further  and  still  further  removed  from  their  primitive 
naturalist  meaning,  in  time,  and  after  the  lapse  of 
centuries,  got  to  be  no  more  than  mere  characters  in 
romance.!  It  would  be  idle  to  attempt  to  derive  a 

* Job,  ch.  xxxvi.,  xxxvii.,  xxxviii. 

f Job,  ch.  xi.,  v.  7;  ch.  xxxviii.,  v.  12-15,  19-20. 

t Nomina  numina,  to  employ  the  expression  used  by  Eugene 
Burnouf. 


MONOTHEISM,  ABSENCE  OF  MYTHOLOGY.  41 


theology  of  the  same  order  from  the  most  essential 
words  of  Semitic  languages,  such  as  or,  “light;” 
sama , “ the  heavens ; ” ars , “ the  earth ; ” ndr , “ fire.” 
None  of  the  names  of  the  Semitic  gods  is  connected 
with  any  such  words  as  these.  The  roots  in  this 
family  of  languages  are,  if  I may  say  so,  realistic  and 
non-transparent;  they  did  not  lend  themselves  to  me- 
taphysics or  mythology.  The  difficulty  of  explaining 
in  Hebrew  the  simplest  philosophical  notions  in  the 
Book  of  Job  and  in  Ecclesiastes  is  something  quite 
astonishing.  The  physical  imagery  which,  in  the 
Semitic  languages,  is  still  almost  on  the  surface, 
obscures  abstract  deduction  and  prevents  anything 
like  a delicate  background  in  speech. 

The  incapacity  of  the  Semitic  languages  to  express 
the  mythological  and  epic  conceptions  of  the  Aryan 
peoples  is  not  less  striking.  One  fails  to  realise  what 
Homer  or  Hesiod  would  he  like  if  translated  into 
Hebrew.  This  is  because,  with  the  Semites,  it  is  not 
merely  the  expression,  but  the  train  of  thought  itself, 
which  is  profoundly  monotheistic.  The  foreign  my- 
thologies become  transformed  under  Semite  treatment 
into  dull  historical  narratives.  Euhemerism  is  their 
sole  system  of  interpretation,  as  we  see  in  Berosus, 
Sanchoniathon,  and  all  the  other  writers  who  have 
transmitted  details  upon  the  Syrian  and  Babylonian 
myths,  in  the  Arab  historians  and  polygraphers,  and 
in  the  first  pages  of  Genesis  itself  A This  singular 

* See  my  memoir  on  Sanchoniathon  in  the  Memoires  de  I’Acade - 
mie  des  Inscriptions,  vol.  xxiii.,  part  2,  1858. 


42  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 


sj^stem  is  due  to  the  most  deep-rooted  laws  of  their 
intellectual  constitution.  For  monotheism  is  of  neces- 
sity euhemerist  in  its  estimates  of  the  mythological 
religions.  Understanding  nothing  of  the  primitive  divi- 
nisation  of  the  forces  of  nature,  which  was  the  source  of 
all  mythology,  it  had  only  one  way  of  giving  a meaning 
to  these  great  constructions  of  ancient  genius,  and 
that  was  to  look  upon  them  as  so  much  embellished 
history,  and  as  so  many  series  of  deified  men. 

This  callow  philosophy  contained,  it  should  he  added, 
only  one  error ; it  exaggerated  beyond  measure  the 
notion  of  the  intentional  intervention  of  superior  forces 
in  the  current  of  human  affairs.  The  nomad  Semitic 
race  was  the  religious  race  par  excellence , because  it 
was,  taking  it  altogether,  the  least  superstitious  of  the 
human  families,  less  of  a dupe  than  any  other  to  the 
dream  of  the  hereafter,  of  that  phantasmagoria  of  a 
double  or  of  a shadow  which  survives  in  the  regions 
below.  It  rigorously  put  away  from  it  those  human 
sacrifices  which  the  city-dwelling  Semites  indulged 
in  quite  as  much  as  the  Aryans.  It  regarded  as  of 
quite  secondary  importance  amulets  and  idols  ; it 
suppressed  the  chimeras  of  complete  survival  after 
death,  chimeras  which  were  homicidal  in  those  days, 
as  they  deprived  man  of  the  true  notion  of  death 
and  caused  him  to  be  very  indifferent  to  how  many 
murders  he  committed.*  Yes,  even  at  this  remote 
epoch  of  which  I am  now  speaking,  the  Semite  shepherd 

* See  Herodotus’s  account  of  the  royal  Scythians.  Book  iv., 
lx.— lxxiii. 


MONOTHEISM , ABSENCE  OF  MYTHOLOGY.  43 


bore  upon  his  forehead  the  seal  of  the  absolute  God, 
upon  which  was  written,  “ This  race  will  rid  the  earth 
of  superstition.” 

The  simplicity  in  worship  of  these  ancient  pastors  has 
never  been  equalled.  In  the  way  of  material  images, 
the  nomad  Semite  had  only  the  nesb  or  masseba  * 
columns  placed  in  the  ground,  which  were  consecrated 
by  pouring  oil  upon  the  summit  of  them.*]*  These  ansab 
covered  the  whole  of  ancient  Arabia,  especially  the  re- 
gion of  Mecca  ; previous  to  the  time  of  Mahomet  J they 
were  looked  upon  as  gods.  When  the  tribe  decamped  it 
left  these  gods  of  stone  behind  it,  and  those  who  came 
after  it  treated  them  with  the  same  respect.  Sacrifice 
is  the  oldest  and  most  serious  error,  as  it  is  the  one 
most  difficult  to  eradicate,  among  those  bequeathed  to 
us  by  the  state  of  unreason  which  man  passed  through 
in  his  infancy.  Primitive  man  (without  distinction 
of  race)  believed  that  the  way  to  calm  the  unknown 
forces  which  surrounded  him  was  to  win  them  over 
as  men  are  won  over,  by  making  them  some  present. 
This  was  not  unnatural,  for  these  gods  whom  he  wanted 
to  make  favourable  to  him  were  evil-disposed  and 
selfish.  The  idea  that  it  was  a cruel  insult  to  try  and 
corrupt  them,  as  one  might  to  corrupt  a judge,  would 

* See  Corpus  inscr.  sewit.,  part  i.,  Nos.  44,  122,  and  122  bis , 
128  and  123  bis,  139,  147,  194,  195,  380;  9th  of  Hadrumetes, 
Euting,  Pun.  Steine,  26,  27. 

t Genesis,  ch.  xxviii.,  v.  18;  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  13;  ch.  xxxv.,  v.  1, 
7 ; ch.  xiii. , v.  4. 

X Koran,  v.,  4,  92;  Freytag,  Lex.,  iv.,  p.  286;  Corpus  inscr. 
semit.,  part  i.;  p.  154. 

F 


44  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

never  suggest  itself  to  beings  of  such  low  morality  and 
so  devoid  of  reasoning  power.  If  a man  was  eaten 
out  by  cancer,  it  was  a god  who  was  eating  his  flesh  ; 
what  more  natural,  then,  than  to  offer  him  fresh  meat 
of  a better  kind  ? The  object  offered  in  sacrifice  is 
always  that  which  the  man  himself  would  like  to  have 
offered  him.  The  Soma  is,  in  the  Hindoo  language, 
something  exquisite.  The  animal  killed  upon  the 
altar  is  always  excellent,  without  spot ; the  parts 
which  are  burnt  are  those  which  are  esteemed  the 
most  highly.  This  revolting  absurdity,  which  the 
first  apparition  of  religious  common  sense  should  have 
swept  away,  had  become  an  act  of  subjection,  a feudal 
service  (as  it  were)  due  to  the  Divinity,  which  the 
patriarchal  faith  did  not  succeed  in  shaking  itself  free 
of.  The  prophets  of  the  eighth  century  b.c.  were 
the  first  to  protest  against  this  aberration,  and  even 
then  they  could  not  suppress  it. 

In  most  cases,  moreover,  the  sacrifice  was  only  the 
preliminary  of  a repast  to  which  it  was  desired  that  a 
special  solemnity  should  be  given.*  The  animal 
offered  to  the  Divinity,  or  rather  what  remained  of  it 
after  the  choice  morsels  had  been  burnt,  was  eaten 
either  by  the  family  alone  or  by  any  guests  who  might 
be  present.  It  was  the  same  with  the  peoples  de- 
scribed by  Homer,  + and  in  nearly  the  whole  of  antiquity. 
To  eat  in  common  was  a sacramental  act.  Thus,  for 

* Genesis,  ch.  xxvi.,  v.  30,  31;  ch.  xxxii.,  v.  54;  Exodus,  ch. 
xviii.,  v.  12. 

t Iliad,  i.,  4G4 — 469  ; Odyssey , iii.,  461 — 463,  470 — 472  ; xiv., 
425 — 453 ; Euripides,  Electra,  835  and  following. 


MONOTHEISM , ABSENCE  OF  MYTHOLOGY.  45 


instance,  in  order  to  consecrate  “ a heap  of  witness,” 
bread  was  eaten  upon  the  top  of  the  stones  so  piled  up.* * * § 
The  compacts  and  alliances  made  were  celebrated  to  the 
accompaniment  of  solemn  sacrifices,  during  which  the 
animals  offered  up  were  cut  into  two  parts,  the  one 
being  placed  opposite  to  the  other,  while  the  contract- 
ing parties  passed  between  them. I In  very  special 
circumstances,  it  was  believed  that  a mysterious  fire, 
equivalent  to  the  acceptance  of  the  sacrifice  by  the 
divinity,  passed  between  the  pieces  of  the  animal  slain. £ 

The  tribe  had  no  priests  or  professional  sacrifices. 
The  patriarch  sacrificed  for  himself,  his  sons,  and  all 
the  tribe.  Preparation  was  made  for  the  sacrifice  by  a 
state  of  saintliness  ( qods ) or  of  purification,  resulting 
from  certain  acts  of  external  cleanliness,  and  certain 
acts  of  abstinence,  notably  from  sexual  indulgence.  § 
Cleanliness  was,  in  the  primitive  faith,  one  of  the 
essential  conditions  for  drawing  near  to  God,  and  one 
of  the  first  measures  of  the  legislators  was,  by  prevent- 
ing people  from  eating  what  was  unclean,  to  wean  them 
from  habits  which  encouraged  what  was  gross. ||  It  is 
probable  that  the  more  respectable  of  the  tribe  had,  at 

* Genesis,  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  46. 

t Genesis,  ch.  xv.,  v.  10 — 17  ; Exodus,  ch.  xxiv.,  v.  8.  *0 pcta 
viur'a  TafiovTcq.  Iliad,  ii.  124;  iii.  105;  Jeremiah,  ch.  xxxiv., 
v.  18  ; Demosthenes,  Adv.  Aristocr.,  68  ; Pausanias,  IV.,  xv.,  4. 

X Genesis,  ch.  xv.,  v.  17  ; a very  ancient  legend.  Compare  the 
sacrifices  of  Balaam,  Numbers,  ch.  xxii.  and  xxiii. 

§ Exodus,  ch.  xix.,  v.  10  and  following  ; see  the  example  of 
Laocoon  in  Greek  history. 

||  Ccedibus  et  victu  f ado . 

F 2 


46  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


that  early  period,  given  np  drinking  blocd.*  Upon  holy 
days  no  leavened  bread  was  eaten,  fermentation  and 
mixtures  being  regarded  as  more  or  less  impure.1 f 
The  nomad  bad  few  festivals;  the  festival  {hag) 
implying  a fixed  religious  centre.  The  idea  of  hag  is 
closely  connected  with  that  of  pilgrimage,  of  proces- 
sions around  a sanctuary,  and  of  dancing  in  a circle. 
This  word,  common  to  all  the  Semitic  languages 
without  exception,  unquestionably  dates  from  the 
ancient  epoch  in  which  the  common  ancestors  of  the 
Hebrews,  the  Arabs,  and  the  Arameans  all  lived 
within  a very  limited  area. 

Together  with  the  word  hag  all  the  Semitic  people  s 
use  the  word  som  or  sown,  signifying  the  fast,  the 
presentation  of  one’s  self  to  the  divinity,  who  is  sup- 
posed to  see  everything,  with  an  air  of  contrition  and 
with  mourning  garments.  The  Elohim  were  supposed 
to  be  in  some  measure  jealous  of  the  happiness  of 
mortals,  so  that  a certain  satisfaction  was  accorded 
to  their  nemesis  by  appearing  before  them  with  con- 
trition and  self-imposed  humiliation.  The  garments 
of  the  afflicted  (the  saq)%  and  the  heaping  of  ashes  on 

* A prescription  earlier  than  any  written  code.  First  book  of 
Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  31,  and  Genesis,  ck.  ix.,  v.  4. 

t The  Book  of  Covenants  (9th  century)  contains  the  germ  of  these 
prescriptions.  The  Levitical  version  is  much  more  modern,  but  it 
merely  registers  the  existence  of  ancient  usages. 

+ This  word,  which  has  been  adopted  by  all  the  Mediterranean 
people,  in  consequence  of  their  trade  with  the  Phoenicians,  was 
applied  to  very  coarse  cloth  of  a dark  colour.  They  were  after- 
wards named  Cilicium , being  principally  made  in  Cilicia. 


MONOTHEISM , ABSENCE  OF  M ETHOLOGY.  47 


the  head,  or  the  shaving  of  the  head,*  were  the 
forced  accompaniment  of  the  fast.  The  prayer  of  the 
man  wearing  the  saq  was  regarded  as  being  very 
efficacious ; for  Elohim  would  surely  have  pity  upon 
one  reduced  to  so  sad  a state,  who  could  not  in  any 
way  give  him  umbrage.  In  public  calamities,  more 
especially,  the  som  and  the  saq  were  invariably  re- 
sorted to.'f  In  very  ancient  times  the  som  was  observed 
at  certain  periods  of  the  year.  The  institution  of  the 
month  of  fasting  among  the  Arabs  was  very  anterior 
to  Islamism.  Thus  the  som  appears  as  a monotheistic 
practice.  The  only  being  to  whom  fasting  can  be 
acceptable  is  the  supreme  God.  It  is  a general  rite, 
and  no  one  particular  god  would  have  any  means  of 
distinguishing  that  the  homage  was  addressed  to  him 
more  than  to  any  other  deity. 

The  oldest  cycle  of  the  Semitic  festivals  was 
governed  by  agriculture,  and  even  the  nomads  were 
guided  by  this  habit.  Tli e pasich,  or  spring  festival,  J 
characterised  by  the  use  of  unleavened  bread,  may 
perhaps  have  just  begun  to  dawn.  The  shearing  of 
the  ewes,  in  David’s  time,§  may  almost  be  regarded 
as  a festival.  The  vintage  was  celebrated  by  dancing. || 
The  custom  of  sounding  the  trumpet  at  each  new 
moon,  and  of  posting  sentinels  to  observe  the  first 

* Amos,  ck.  viii.,  v.  10. 

t Judges,  ck.  xx.,  v.  26 ; First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  vii.,  v.  6 ; 
ck.  xxxi.,  v.  13 ; Joel,  ck.  i.  and  ii. 

f Leviticus,  ck.  xxiii.,  v.  9 — 22  ; ancient  fragment. 

§ Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  xiii. , v.  23,  &c. 

(|  Judges,  ck.  ix.,  v.  27 ; ck.  xxi.,  v.  20  and  following. 


48  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


appearance  of  the  “ sickle” — a very  useful  custom 
among  a people  knowing  nothing  of  scientific  astro- 
nomy— may  have  already  been  in  existence.  In  any 
event,  the  appearance  of  the  new  moon  was  made  the 
occasion  for  sacrifices  and  festivals.* * * §  The  Sabbath 
was  so  useless  to  the  nomads,  whose  labour  was  essen- 
tially of  an  intermittent  kind,!  that  the  ancient 
nomad  Semites  probably  did  not  observe  it,  although 
they  saw  this  wholesome  practice  observed  in  Assyria. 

Some  other  rites,  common  to  all  Semitic  creeds,  seem 
to  attest  the  unity  of  these  religions  and  their  patri- 
archal origin.  Such  are  the  Sakoea  of  the  Phoenicians, 
and  of  the  Babylonians,  J festivals  which  were  annually 
celebrated  under  the  tent,  and  which  remind  one  of  the 
feast  of  tabernacles  of  the  Hebrews.  Leviticus  speaks 
of  this  festival  as  being  a memorial  of  the  ancient 
nomad  life  of  the  Hebrews. § This  explanation  has 
been  met  by  the  objection  that  the  booths  made  of 
houghs  would  he  a very  inaccurate  representation  of 
a sojourn  in  Arabia  Petrsea.  But  at  a period  much 
earlier  than  the  compiling  of  the  Book  of  Leviticus, 
in  the  hook  of  Hosea,||  the  same  comparison  is  made, 
and  instead  of  huts  made  of  houghs,  tabernacles  are 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xx.,  v.  5,  18,  24. 

t The  nomad  Arabs  of  tbe  East  are  scarcely  at  all  acquainted 
■with  tbe  Mussulman  Friday. 

+ 'E oprr]  Saratov  = fTCDH  nn.  See  Movers,  Die  Eel.  der 
Plicen.,  pp.  480  and  following. 

§ Leviticus,  ch.  xxiii,  v.  42,  and  following. 

|]  Hosea,  ch.  xii.,  v.  10. 


MONOTHEISM,  ABSENCE  OF  MYTHOLOGY . 49 


spoken  of.* * * §  There  is  therefore  good  reason  for 
regarding  this  feast  of  tabernacles  as  a souvenir  of  the 
primitive  life  common  to  all  the  Semitic  peoples,  being 
preserved  even  among  those  who  had  travelled  the 
farthest  away  from  it. 

The  nabi,  or  man  inspired  by  God  (sorcerer,  diviner 
of  the  future,  or  prophet),  had  no  place  in  a society 
where  the  father  of  the  family  had  absolute  power. 
The  patriarch  would  assuredly  have  prevented  the 
nabi,  as  he  did  the  cohen , from  acquiring  an  important 
position  or  endangering  his  own  supremacy.  Prophecy 
does  not  appear  to  have  developed  except  among  the 
tribes  already  established.  The  belief  in  revelations 
through  dreams  was  universal,  and  the  gift  of  explain- 
ing them  was  also  a revelation. | Man  protected  by  a 
god  did  all  his  acts  under  the  inspiration  of  this  familiar 
demon.  It  was  in  dreams  for  the  most  part  that  the 
voice  of  his  god  spoke  to  him.J  Certain  trees,  such  as 
the  turpentine  tree,  were  regarded  as  oracular,  because 
they  had  deep  roots  in  the  ground  and  seemed  to  be 
old.§ 

A sort  of  deism  without  metaphysics  was  what  the 
fathers  of  Judaism  and  Islamism  inaugurated  at  that 
early  period,  with  a very  sure  and  unerring  instinct. 

* E'bns\ 

t Genesis,  ch.  xl.,  v.  8 ; ck.  xli.,  v.  28,  32,  38,  39. 

+ Job,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  15.  It  was  doubtless  in  dreams  that 
Camos  spoke  to  Mesa : WIS'D  '7  Inscr.,  Daibon,  lines  14, 

32. 

§ Elon  More , Eton  Mamre,  Eton  Meonenim,  Judges,  ck.  ix., 
v.  37. 


5° 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


This  god  of  theirs,  formed  by  a fusion  of  the  nameless 
divinities,  became  the  absolute  God  who  loves  what  is 
good  and  hates  what  is  evil,  the  God  whose  worship  is 
prompted  by  an  honest  heart.  The  inroad  of  the 
scientific  mind  within  the  last  century  has  made  a 
great  change  in  the  relation  of  things.  What  was  an 
advantage  has  become  a drawback.  The  Semitic  mind 
and  intellect  have  appeared  as  hostile  to  experimental 
science  and  to  research  into  the  mechanical  causes 
of  the  world.  In  appearance  nearer  than  Paganism  to 
the  rational  conception  of  the  universe,  the  theology 
of  the  nomad  Semite,  transported  into  scholastic  minds, 
has  been  in  reality  more  injurious  to  positive  science 
than  polytheism.  Paganism  persecuted  science  less 
bitterly  than  the  monotheistic  religions  originating 
with  the  Semites.  Islam  was  the  destruction  of  posi- 
tive philosophy,  which  attempted  to  struggle  into 
being  among  some  of  the  peoples  which  it  had  sub- 
jected.* Christian  theology,  with  its  Bible,  has,  for 
the  last  three  centuries,  been  the  worst  enemy  of 
science.  Nothing  can  be  more  dangerous,  in  one 
sense,  than  what  is  half  absurd  and  half  true ; for 
humanity  is  but  of  middling  force ; it  throws  up  too 
strong  a poison ; it  drags  life  on  with  the  dose  of  stu- 
pidity which  is  not  sufficient  to  kill  it.  It  is  all  a 
question  of  time  and  age.  Islam  represents  progress 
to  the  negro  who  adopts  it.  Eliphaz  of  Them  an, 

* I have  dwelt  in  detail  upon  this  point  in  my  Conferences  ei 
Discours,  pp.  375  and  following. 


MONOTHEISM , ABSENCE  OF  MYTHOLOGY.  51 


though  holding  with  regard  to  the  universe  ideas  the 
most  opposite  to  the  truth,  was  very  superior,  for  the 
time  in  which  he  lived,  to  the  superstitious  Gaul  or 
to  the  Italiot,  as  he  is  described  to  us  in  the  Eugn- 
bine  tablets  and  the  hymns  of  the  Arvales  Fratres. 
And  yet,  for  all  that,  the  positive  science  of  nature 
will  be  found  to  proceed  far  more  readily  from  the 
genius  of  Gaul  or  of  Italy  than  from  that  of  Thernan. 
A Breton  peasant  is  far  more  of  an  unconscious  Pagan 
than  a Mussulman ; and  yet  a very  little  schooling 
will  make  the  Breton  peasant  into  a man  of  good  sound 
reasoning,  readily  understanding  positivist  naturalism, 
whereas  the  Mussulman  can  only  he  brought  to  a con- 
ception of  this  sort  with  the  utmost  difficulty,  and 
rejects  it  as  an  abomination. 

And  yet  these  ancient  patriarchs  of  the  Syrian 
deserts  were  in  reality  corner-stones  for  humanity. 
They  are  the  “ trismegists  ” of  religious  history. 
Judaism,  Christianity,  and  Islamism  all  proceed  from 
them.  The  essential  point,  for  a nation  as  well  as  for 
an  individual,  is  to  have  an  ideal  behind  it.  The 
branches  of  the  Semitic  family  which  had  gone  through 
the  nomad  life  retained  their  recollection  of  it  after  they 
had  emerged  from  it,  and  carried  their  minds  hack  to 
it  as  to  an  ideal.  The  descendants  of  these  ancient 
puritans  of  the  desert  could  not  tear  away  their 
thoughts  from  the  paradise  inhabited  by  their  fore- 
fathers. We  are  all  of  us  beset  by  the  thought  of 
what  we  sprung  from.  The  charm  of  patriarchal  life 
had  an  invincible  spell  over  the  imagination  of  the 


52 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


succeeding  centuries.*  This  mode  of  existence  stood 
out  as  being  essentially  noble  and  pure — purer,  no 
doubt,  than  it  was  in  reality,  and  the  more  ardent 
minds  were  constantly  yearning  to  go  back  to  it.  The 
march  towards  monotheism,  which  was  the  whole 
circulus  of  the  life  of  these  peoples,  is  in  reality  nothing 
more  than  a return  to  the  intuition  of  their  early 
history.  Henceforth  the  tendency  of  the  Semitic 
peoples,  who  are  the  most  richly  endowed  with  the 
spirit  of  the  race,  will  be  to  rejuvenate  the  visions  of 
this  distant  past. 

The  branch  whose  history  I am  relating  will  more 
particularly  be  found  from  age  to  age  impelled  by  the 
desire  to  reconstitute  this  patriarchal  state  in  which 
superstition,  social  complications,  and  the  violence  of 
the  wealthy  will  effect  a sweeping  change.  The  author 
of  the  Book  of  Job  finds,  his  conception  of  religious  per- 
fection in  the  practices  of  the  desert.  The  Beehabites 
set  themselves  up  for  carrying  on  the  traditions  of  the 
ancient  mode  of  life,  and  were  very  highly  esteemed 
on  that  account.  The  schism  of  the  northern  tribes, 
after  Solomon’s  reign,  was  due  to  the  instinctive  repug- 
nance which  they  felt  for  straying  away  from  the  path 
which  their  forefathers  trod.  We  shall  find  the  school 
of  Elijah  or  Elisha  founding  the  whole  movement  of 
the  following  centuries  upon  a reaction  towards  the 

* We  came  one  day,  while  travelling  in  Syria,  upon  a Bedouin 
encampment.  My  men,  who  were  not  any  of  them  nomads,  were 
seized  with  sudden  enthusiasm,  and  greeted  these  vagrants  as 
brethren  of  more  noble  status  than  themselves. 


MONOTHEISM , ABSENCE  OF  MYTHOLOGY.  53 


past.  The  greater  prophets,  who  were  the  purest 
representatives  of  the  spirit  of  race,  made  this  their 
programme ; the  Mosaic  Torah , in  its  different  ages, 
was  a utopian  reversion  toward  the  patriarchal  ideal, 
to  a society  in  which  there  should  be  neither  rich  nor 
poor,  neither  sovereigns  nor  subjects ; in  a word,  to  the 
ancient  tribal  system,  founded  solely  upon  the  family 
and  upon  the  association  of  affiliated  families.  Tt 
is  certain  that  the  primitive  nomad  was  more  ad- 
vanced in  religious  matters  than  David  and  Omri : he 
knew  nothing  of  the  cruel  Iahveh  ; human  sacrifices, 
in  which  the  national  deity  delighted,  did  not  exist  at 
all,  or  at  all  events  had  not  the  character  of  sheer 
extermination. 

It  often  happens  that  the  ideal  of  a people  is  an 
aim  conceived  in  advance,  which  that  people  puts 
before  it  in  order  to  stimulate  itself  to  reach  its  end. 
For  the  peoples  who  descended  from  the  tent  of  the 
patriarchs,  on  the  contrary,  their  ideal  was  behind 
them  ; and  it  was  one  which  they  saw  in  actual  exist- 
ence among:  the  tribes  that  had  retained  their  nomad 
mode  of  life.  They  did  not,  therefore,  create  a myth 
when  they  joyed  in  the  stories  of  the  oldest  patriar- 
chal life,  — they  were  rather  recalling  a memory; 
and  this  memory  of  a lost  purity  and  happiness  was 
ever  tempting  them  to  revert  to  a state,  the  perfection 
of  which  had  assuredly  been  exaggerated,  but  which 
had  left  an  indelible  trace  upon  the  character  of  the 
nation. 


CHAPTEE  V. 


ANCIENT  BABYLONIAN  INFLUENCE. 

As  a rule,  a powerfully  organised  civilisation,  girt  by 
barbarians  or  nomads,  exercises  two  opposing  influ- 
ences upon  these  populations.  It  at  once  attracts  and 
repels  them.  It  attracts  them  by  the  thousand  and 
one  advantages  which  an  active  form  of  civilisation 
offers  to  poor  jiersons  in  a state  of  dire  distress.  It 
repels  them  by  an  air  of  hardness  and  immorality. 
This  is  the  feeling  of  the  Arabs  in  Algeria,  who, 
while  recognising  the  material  superiority  of  French 
society,  regard  it  with  nothing  but  disgust,  deeming  it 
to  be  devoid  of  any  high  principle  and  to  be  a reflection 
upon  the  liberty  of  action  of  an  honourable  man,  who 
should  not  allow  himself  to  be  thus  ticketed  and 
numbered.  Ever  since  civilisation  has  gained  the 
mastery  in  the  world,  this  view  can  but  lead  to 
the  ruin  of  the  human  families  which  make  it  the 
limit  of  their  vision.  Put,  in  the  early  ages,  such  a 
sentiment  was  often  of  a preservative  tendency. 
Through  it  the  Semitic  tent  succeeded  in  keeping 
itself  pure  from  many  abominations,  the  remains  of 
primitive  bestiality,  and  from  the  aberrations  which 


ANCIENT  BABYLONIAN  INFLUENCE. 


55 


accompanied  tlie  first  delirious  ideas  of  a dawning 
conscience.  Probity  was  of  more  value  than  it  is  at 
the  present  time  for  the  general  work  of  progress.  It 
was  a delicate  little  plant,  not  acclimatised  anywhere, 
menaced  with  destruction  wherever  it  grew,  without 
which  the  human  culture  could  not  flourish.  What- 
ever protected  it  served  to  forward  the  progress  of 
true  civilisation. 

As  a rule,  the  nomad  hordes  which,  as  we  have 
seen,  bore  within  them,  simple  shepherds  as  they 
were,  a lofty  moral  principle,  lived  side  by  side  with 
societies  already  established  that  did  not  in  any  way 
become  mixed  with  them.  These  small  groups  of 
simple  creatures  had  a sort  of  horror  for  what  they 
did  not  understand.  Egypt,  and  Assyria  more  espe- 
cially, were  to  them  unfathomable  depths.  The  enor- 
mous number  of  slaves  and  functionaries  must  have 
been  revolting  to  them,  while  the  gigantic  buildings 
struck  them  as  sheer  acts  of  folly  and  of  undue  pride. 
But  in  most  cases  the  attraction  proved  too  strong. 
The  tribe  assented  to  certain  conditions  of  authority, 
and  sought  its  sustenance  in  the  interstices  of  a greater 
society  than  itself.  It  must  be  remarked  that  these 
ancient  civilisations  were  not  as  compact  as  our  own  ; 
they  had  internal  gaps  in  which  the  nomad  could  find 
room,  and  which  seemed  as  it  were  to  invite  him  to 
occupy  them.  It  was  in  this  way  that  Egypt  has 
always  attracted  the  Arabs,  and  has  found  room  for 
them  in  its  administrative  system,  apparently  so  closely 
filled  in.  The  population  of  Babylonia  does  not  ap- 


56  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

pear  to  have  been  at  all  dense  ;*  shepherd  bands  could 
easily  occupy  a place  in  the  country  analogous  to  that 
of  the  Bedouins  of  the  present  day  in  Syria  and  Egypt, 
or  of  the  Gypsies  in  those  countries  where  they  are 
the  most  numerous. 

Among  the  nomad  Semites  who  migrated  from 
Arabia  into  the  more  favoured  countries  bordering 
upon  the  Mediterranean,  some  arrived  direct  from 
Arabia,  while  others,  stopped  by  the  great  desert, 
made  a circuit  along  the  Euphrates  and  reached  Syria 
at  Mabug  and  Aleppo,  after  having  made  a more  or 
less  lengthened  sojourn  upon  Babylonian  soil.  This 
sojourn  made  a deep  mark  upon  them.  The  prevalent 
language  of  Babylonia  had  for  a long  time  been  the 
Semitic  idiom  known  as  Assyrian.  It  is  doubtful 
whether  the  tribes  speaking  the  Ilebrew  or  Aramaic 
languages  were  able  to  understand  it.  But  the  civi- 
lisation which  these  tribes  had  before  their  eyes  while 
wandering  over  the  vast  marshes  of  the  Euphrates 
was,  if  I may  so  express  myself,  a speaking  one,  even 
for  those  who  could  not  unravel  the  complicated  mys- 
tery of  its  sacred  writings. 

Babylon  was  for  centuries  a still  more  brilliant 
beacon-light  than  Egypt,  shining  out  amid  profound 
darkness.  It  cannot  be  said  with  certainty  to  what 
race  belonged  the  creators  of  this  civilisation  as  ancient 
as  that  of  Egypt,  and  not  less  original  in  its  character. 
They  were  neither  Semites  nor  Aryans.  The  name  of 
Turanians  is  vague  and  doubtful.  The  application  to 

* This  seems  proved  by  the  way  in  which  the  kings  of  Assyria 
and  of  Chaldsea  transplanted  the  inhabitants. 


ANCIENT  BABYLONIAN  INFLUENCE. 


57 


them  of  the  names  of  Cushites  and  Cephenes  is  quite 
arbitrary.  The  language  which  they  spoke  has  not 
been  unveiled  to  us,  and  we  are  in  ignorance  as  to 
whether  it  remains  concealed  beneath  the  still  un- 
deciphered Accadian  or  Sumerian  inscriptions.  It 
appears,  however,  that  the  first  impression  of  the 
Assyriologists  was  the  correct  one.*  The  Assyrian 
hieroglyphicism,  the  origin  of  what  is  called  cuneiform 
writing,  was  neither  Semitic  nor  Aryan,  and  it  was 
only  later  that  it  was  used  to  write  Semitic  and  Aryan 
idioms. 

In  close  connexion  with  the  creation  of  Assyrian 
hieroglyphicism  was  the  creation  of  a whole  school 
which  plays  a leading  part  in  the  history  of  human 
genius.  Assyria  had,  from  the  very  first,  her  castes 
of  savants  and  priests.  She  created  arithmetic,  geo- 
metry, the  calendar,  and  astronomy ; she  organised 
human  existence,  and,  by  establishing  the  week, 
brought  into  existence  the  Sabbath.  So  rational 
science  was  formed.  A number  of  meteorological 
data,  which  still  hold  good,  and  which  even  the  great 
innovations  of  the  Trench  Ee  volution  were  powerless 
to  affect,  were  established.  The  seven  planets  gave 
their  names  to  the  seven  days  of  the  week,  and  the 
seventh  day  had  special  characteristics  which  marked 
it  as  a day  of  rest.f  The  divisions  of  the  circle  and  of 
time  were  the  same  as  they  are  at  the  present  day  for 

* Oppert,  Exped.  scientif.  en  Mesopotamie,  vol.  ii.  (Paris,  1859). 
See  Journal  des  Savants,  March,  1859,  pp.  181  and  following 

f Schrader,  Die  Keilinschriften  und  das  A.  T.,  vol.  ii.  pp.  18, 
&c. ; G.  Smith,  The  Assyrian  Eponym  Canon,  pp.  19  and  following. 


58  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


all  nations.  There  was  an  abundance  of  literature, 
half  mythical,  half  scientific,  which  claimed  to  relate 
the  origin  of  the  world  and  of  humanity.  The  popular 
imagination  was  charmed  by  interminable  tales  of  gods 
and  giants.*  But  all  this  literature  was  pervaded  by  a 
most  remarkable  current  of  ideas.  It  was  not  a mere 
simple  mythology,  sporting  amid  the  endless  play  of 
words,  and  following  into  the  dim  distance  the  capri- 
cious flight  of  metaphor ; it  betrayed  a glimmering  of 
scientific  hypotheses,  starting  from  accurate  and  correct 
observations,  generalising  in  some  cases  with  singular 
good  sense,  and  expressing  the  first  perceptions  of  rea- 
soning in  a form  which  may  seem  to  us  overstrained, 
now  that  we  have  come  to  proceed  only  by  the  ana- 
lytical method  in  the  research  after  causes. 

In  a word,  the  human  intellect  at  this  advanced 
post  of  its  development  tentatively  claimed  to  explain 
the  origin  of  the  world  without  the  intervention  of 
the  gods.  Spontaneous  generation,  too  hastily  con- 
cluded, was  the  fundamental  dogma  of  Babylonian 
science.^  The  world  J came  out  of  chaos, § from  a 

* F.  Lenormant,  Les  Origines  Ae  VHistoire,  vol.  i.  (1880). 
t Berosus,  Damascius,  Nabathean  Agriculture,  fragment  dis- 
covered by  Smith  (allowing  for  the  rectifications  of  Abbe  Quentin). 
See  Chwolson,  Die  Ssabier  (St.  Petersburg,  1859)  ; Lenormant, 
Origines  de  VHistoire,  vol.  i.,  appendix.  Comment,  sur  Berose 
(Paris,  1871);  my  essays  upon  Sanchoniathon  and  upon  Nabathean 
Agriculture  ( Mem  de  V Acad,  des  Insc.  et  Belles-Lettres,  vol.  xxiii. 
part  ii.,  and  vol.  xxiv.,  part  i. 

+ See  Lenormant  and  Schrader’s  works  quoted  above. 

§ inn  = ♦ m2  = J3auv  de  Sanchoniathon,  Ialdebaoth  of  the 

Gnostics. 


ANCIENT  BABYLONIAN  INFLUENCE. 


59 


profound  abyss  (Tiamat),*  from  a fruitful  mudbank, 
after  the  model  of  the  great  alluvions  which  the 
Euphrates  and  Tigris  form  where  their  waters  unite. 
From  this  moist  chaos,  vivified  by  an  amorous  wind,f 
emerged  one  after  another  creations  more  or  less 
discordant,  which  disappeared  to  make  room  for 
beings  more  in  harmony  with  one  another,  and  lastly 
for  man. 

The  dwelling-place  of  this  primitive  humanity  was 
Lower  Chaldaea,  conceived  as  being  a paradise,  the 
source  of  all  the  rivers,  J with  the  sacred  tree  in  the 
middle  of  it.§  Ten  great  mythical  reigns,  each 
lasting  about  a thousand  years,  made  up  the  duration 
of  this  primordial  age,  during  which  deified  men  built 
the  first  towns,  invented  arts,  and  laid  the  foundations 
of  civilised  life.  J| 

A deluge,  from  which  only  one  man,  taking  refuge 
on  a ship  with  those  of  the  animal  species  intended  to 
reproduce  their  race,  escaped,  separated  the  mythical 
from  an  heroic  age  teeming  with  the  stories  of  giants 
born  of  the  connection  between  demons  and  women. 
The  origin  of  Babylon  and  of  Nineveh  was  ascribed  to 

* Dinn  = Mummu  Tiamat  (nainn)  = t avOe  of  Damascius  = 
TavarO  (for  6aXarO)  of  Bei’OSUS. 

t ITH  = Urevga  of  Sanckoniatkon.  ’A7racrtov  of  Damascius  = 
pll’En  = ILJ0os. 

X Fr.  Delitzsck,  Wo  lag  das  Baradies  ? (Leipsic,  1881). 

§ Menant.  Cylindres  de  VAssyrie,  pp.  61  and  following ; Cylin- 
dres  de  la  Chaldee,  pp.  189  and  following;  Lenormant,  Origines  de 
I’Histoire,  vol.  i.  pp.  74  and  following. 

||  Compare  with  the  Phoenician  fables  handed  down  by  Sanckonia- 
tkon, fables  the  Assyrian  original  of  which  scarcely  admits  of  a 
doubt. 


6o 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


this  race  of  giants,  the  most  celebrated  of  whom  was 
the  hunter  Merodak  or  Nimrod,  who  strangled  a lion 
by  squeezing  it  against  his  belt.*  The  hillocks  of 
bricks  which  served  as  foundations  to  the  Babylonian 
temples,  and  especially  the  gigantic  Borsippa,  the 
tower  of  tongues,  became  the  subject  of  innumerable 
legends,  which  each  generation  has  moulded  into 
accordance  with  its  bent  of  thought. 

Another  centre  of  legends,  to  the  south  of  Babylon, 
was  the  ancient  land  of  Ur,f  with  its  mythical  king, 
Father  Orham,  looked  upon  as  a founder,  a pacific 
legislator,  and  a saint,  t It  is  the  oldest  locality  of 
Babylonia ; and  the  texts  taken  from  it  represent  the 
still  lineal  form  of  the  so-called  cuneiform  writing.§ 
The  kings  of  Ur  are  the  oldest  known  Babylonian 
dynasty.  A brick  elevation  marks  the  site  of  the 
principal  temple.  Ur,  or  Our-Casdim,  as  the  Hebrews 

* See  Musee  du  Louvre,  Assyrian  room,  Nos.  4 and  5.  See 
Schrader’s  work  quoted  above,  pp.  92,  93. 

f Now  Moqayyar,  or,  as  erroneously  written,  Moghayr.  See 
Schrader,  pp.  129  and  following;  Loftus,  Clialcl.  and  Sns.,  pp.  127 
and  followiDg;  Menant,  Bab.  et  la  Chahl.,  p.  71  and  following; 
George  Smith,  Chald.  Gen.,  p.  246  ; Delitzsch,  pp.  226,  227 ; 
Maspero,  Hist.  Anc.,  4th  edition,  pp.  154  and  following. 

f Rawlinson,  Cuneiform  Inscriptions  of  Western  Asia,  vol.  i., 
plates  1 and  following;  Oppert,  Exped.  de  Mesop.,  vol.  i.,pp.  264 — 
266  ; Hist,  des  Empires  de  Chahl.  et  d'Assyrie,  pp.  16  and  follow- 
ing ; Menant,  Cyl.  de  la  Chald.,  pp.  127 — 158  ; Collection  de  Clercq, 
pp.  14  and  following,  pp.  31,  67  and  following.  There  is  a 
doubt  as  to  all  these  combinations,  the  reading  Ourkhammou  not 
being  certain.  The  Assyriologists  take  it  to  be  the  name  of  a real 
king. 

§ British  Museum,  Cuneiform  Inscriptions,  vol.  i.,  plates  1 and 
following. 


ANCIENT  BABYLONIAN  INFLUENCE.  61 

called  it,  may  be  regarded  as  the  first  centre  of  Baby- 
lonian or  Chaldean  civilisation. 

All  the  large  towns  in  this  marshy  region  where 
the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  meet  had  in  the  same  way 
their  divine  legends,  dating  from  the  most  remote 
antiquity.  Erech* * * §  equalled  Ur  in  nobility  and 
religious  importance,  j"  The  recently  discovered  sculp- 
tures of  Tellolj:  show  us  the  dwellers  in  the  primi- 
tive Lower  Chaldeea  under  the  most  original  and 
striking  aspect.  These  strange  cities  of  Ur,  Erech, 
Babel,  and  Tello  made  the  very  strongest  impres- 
sion upon  the  nomad  Semites  who  had  migrated  from 
Arabia.  Those  enormous  pyramids,  the  object  in 
creating  which  was  quite  beyond  their  comprehension, 
gave  rise  to  no  end  of  fables. § The  nomad,  like  the 
barbarian,  does  not  understand  large  buildings  ; he 
has  the  most  childish  tales  to  explain  the  existence 
of  all  colossal  ruins. ||  The  wonderful  tower  of 

Borsippa,  more  especially,  must  have  suggested  the 

* Now  Warka. 

t Loftus,  pp.  139  and  following,  160  and  following  ; Delitzsch, 

p.  94. 

J Decouvertes  en  Chaldee,  by  M.  de  Sarzec  (Paris,  Leroux), 
originals  in  the  Louvre. 

§ Genesis,  cb.  xi.,  v.  1 and  following;  Herodotus,  book  i.,  p. 
181.  We  know  of  at  least  three  towers  of  Babel : Birs-Nemroud, 
Babil,  and  Akerkouf. 

||  Tales  about  Palmyra,  Balbeck,  the  monuments  in  the  Hauran, 
Petra,  the  alleged  Themoudite  fortresses,  which  are  merely  tombs. 
Notices  et  Extraits  de  VAcad.  des  Inscr.  et  Belles-Lettres,  vol.  xviii., 
part  ii.,  pp.  4,  5.  Compare  with  the  Mirabilia  urbis  Roma  of 
the  Middle  Ages. 


G 2 


62  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL 

most  singular  ideas,  as,  for  instance,  whether  the 
power  of  man  carried  so  far  is  not  an  insult  to  God. 

The  wanderings  of  the  nomads  did  not  lead  them 
much  in  the  direction  of  the  Tigris  or  Nineveh.  They 
generally  halted  in  that  part  of  Mesopotamia  known 
as  Padan-Aram,  the  principal  centres  of  which  were 
Harran,  Sarug,  Edessa.  From  the  point  of  view  of  its 
civilisation  this  country  was  an  annex  of  Assyria,  a 
sort  of  Aramaic  Babylon.  Aramaic  was  spoken  in 
it,  and  this  alone  would  have  been  sufficient  to  make 
many  important  changes  in  the  traditions  of  Babel 
and  Ur.  Harran,  moreover,  appears  to  have  been 
even  then,  what  it  remained  up  to  the  thirteenth 
century,  a city  of  syncretism,  in  which  the  myths  of 
Babylonian  origin  underwent  all  kinds  of  transforma- 
tions. The  great  seer  of  the  Israelite  legends,  Balaam, 
is  supposed  to  have  come  from  there  A Harran,  in 
the  course  of  its  long  and  singular  history,  stands  out 
at  every  epoch  as  a sort  of  colony  and  emporium  of 
Babylonian  ideas,  j* 

The  pastors  found  here  the  cycle  of  Chaldean  ideas 
under  a form  more  acceptable  to  them,  gilded  over  as 
they  were  by  a sort  of  Semitic  varnish.  The  names  of 
characteristic  personages,  for  instance  that  of  the  first 
woman  ( Ilava , u she  who  gives  life”), possibly  the  name 
of  the  god  I ah  veil,]:  stood  out  as  Aramaic  words  easily 

* Numbers,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  5 ; ch.  xxiii.,  v.  7 ; Schrader,  pp.  155, 
156. 

t Chwolson,  Die  Ssabier  und  der  Ssabismus  (St.  Petersburg, 

J See  the  following  chapter. 


ANCIENT  BABYLONIAN  INFLUENCE. 


63 


understood.  The  hero  of  the  deluge  became  a man  well 
pleasing  to  heaven,  called  sometimes  Hanok,  at  other 
times  Noah.  The  ark  rested  upon  the  mountains  of  the 
land  of  Ararat  (Armenia),  whereas  in  the  Assyrian  text 
there  is  no  allusion  to  this  northern  country.  The  in- 
habitants of  Padan-Aram  were  particularly  attached 
to  the  legend  of  the  fabled  Orham,  king  of  Ur,  and  called 
him  Aborham  (Abraham),*  the  Father-Orham,  a name 
which  was  destined  to  go  down  into  the  deepest  strata 
of  mythological  history,  pater  Orchamus.j*  These 
kings  of  Ur  were  more  or  less  patriarchs,  at  once 
kings  and  fathers  of  their  peoples.  $ The  Assyrians 
often  depicted  them,  and  always  in  a way  which 
harmonises  with  the  Abraham  of  tradition,  as  seated 
in  an  arm-chair,  with  a benevolent  aspect  and  without 
any  sort  of  military  pomp  or  circumstance.  The  chief 
title  of  Father-Orham  to  the  veneration  of  his  pacific 
admirers  was  that  he  had  substituted  the  sacrifice  of  a 
ram  for  that  of  human  beings,  as  in  the  case  of  his  son 
Isaac. § I am  inclined  to  think  that  this  Orham  is  the 
real  or  imaginary  person  who  has  lent  his  name 

* In  very  early  times  the  letters  n and  n were  used  indifferently 
in  Semitic  etymology. 

f Rexit  Achasmenias  urbes  pater  Orchamus,  isque 
Septimus  a prisco  numeratur  origine  Belo. 

Ovid,  Metam. , iv.,  p.  212.  Pater  no  doubt  had  in  Ovid’s  text  a 
more  limited  meaning  ( pater  ejus,  scil.  Leucothoes );  but  the  ex- 
pression Pater  Orchamus  seems  none  the  less  to  have  forced  itself 
upon  Ovid  by  tradition. 

+ Menant,  Cyl.  de  la  Chaldee,  pp.  129 — 136,  137 — 143  ; Catal. 
de  la  coll.  Be  Clercq,  pp.  17  and  following. 

§ Menant,  Cyl.  de  la  Chaldee,  pp.  144  and  following,  146,  147, 
151.  Catal.  Be  Clercq , pp.  17  and  following. 


64  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


and  several  of  tlie  most  characteristic  traits  to  the 
history  of  Abraham.  This  may  be  all  the  more  readily 
admitted  because  these  myths  of  Orb  am  were  generally 
represented  on  small  cylinders  of  very  little  value, 
which  were  passed  about  among  the  nomads  as  talis- 
mans, and  which  must  have  given  a great  impetus  to 
their  imagination.* 

The  myth  of  Nimrod  also  figures  in  the  Biblical 
narratives  under  a form  peculiarly  typical  of  Harran. 
He  remained  right  into  the  Middle  Ages  one  of  the 
gods  of  the  city  of  Harran. f Most  of  the  incidents 
borrowed  from  Babylonia  which  are  to  be  found  in  the 
early  chapters  of  Genesis  are  not  taken  at  first  hand  ; 
they  have  come  through  Padan,  and  represent  Baby- 
lonia as  seen  through  Harran  memories.  The  names 
of  the  antediluvian  patriarchs,  J answering  to  the 
mythical  kings  of  Babylon,  also  appear  to  be  Har- 
ranian  combinations. 

The  Semite  herders  who  led  their  flocks  in  this 
region  understood  all  tliis§  and  were  much  struck  by 
it.  Their  situation  was  like  that  of  Mahomet,  unable 
either  to  read  or  write,  in  the  presence  of  Judaism  and 

* Menant,  see  previous  note. 

f Assemani,  Bill.  Orient.,  vol.  i.  p.  327 ; Wellhausen,  Prolego- 
mena, p.  x. 

X See  the  two  identical  lists,  one  Jehovist,  the  other  Elohist, 
Genesis,  ch.  iv.  and  v. 

§ The  influence  of  the  Babylonian  cosmogonies  also  crops  up 
again  among  the  Phoenicians  (Sanchoniathon,  Damascius).  But 
that  perhaps  is  due  to  more  recent  adaptations.  See  Memoires  de 
VAcad.  des  Inscript,  et  Belles-Lettres , vol.  xxiii.,  part  ii.,  pp.  241 
and  following. 


ANCIENT  BABYLONIAN  INFLUENCE. 


65 


Christianity,  overloaded  with  writings.  Everything 
was  done  by  word  of  mouth,  by  popular  narrative. 
The  resemblance  between  the  Hebrew  narratives  and 
the  ancient  Babylonian  narratives  was  of  the  same  kind 
as  that  bet  ween  the  Koran  and  the  Old  Testament  and 
the  Gospels.  In  accordance  with  their  Euhemerist  in- 
tellect, opposed  as  it  was  to  mythology,  the  nomad 
Semites  simplified  these  ancient  fables,  flattened  them 
down,  so  to  speak,  and  reduced  them  to  dimensions 
which  admitted  of  their  being  carried  about  with  the 
baggage  of  the  nomad.  By  the  mere  process  of 
passing  into  the  hands  of  the  Aramaic  populations 
or  wandering  pastors,  who  knew  nothing  of  writing, 
these  theogonic  epics  came  to  have  a childish  and 
almost  puerile  aspect.  The  story  of  the  creation  be- 
came toned  down  ; Paradise  was  materialised,  and  its 
topography,  the  farther  one  got  from  Lower  Chaldea, 
became  vague  and  contradictory  ; the  mythical  kings, 
who,  according  to  the  Assyrian  narratives,  reigned  for 
three  or  four  thousand  years,  became  patriarchs,  who 
lived  eight  or  nine  hundred  years.  This  seemed  less 
difficult  to  believe.  At  the  same  time  the  deluge 
assumed  a moral  meaning ; it  was  a punishment.  The 
myths  as  to  the  origin  of  Babel  assume  a hostile 
physiognomy : Babel  is  a proud  city  ; an  insult 
against  God.  IJr,  upon  the  contrary,  is  a primitive 
cradle  of  holiness. 

In  this  way  an  element  of  capital  importance  was 
introduced  into  the  Semitic  tradition.  The  basis 
of  the  religion  which  was  adopted  by  the  world 


06  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

is  the  simple  and  moral  elohism  of  the  Semite  pastor. 
But  it  was  an  insufficient  basis.  What  was  wanted, 
especially  in  view  of  the  disgust  of  mythology  induced 
by  the  result  of  many  centuries,  was  a seeming  expla- 
nation of  the  origin  of  things,  a cosmogony  with  an 
air  of  being  reasonable,  positive,  and  historical.  The 
strange  mixture  of  real  science  and  of  fable  contained 
in  the  Chaldean-Hebraic  system  marked  it  out  to  fill 
this  void.  Boiled  down,  strapped  tight,  if  I may  so 
express  myself,  upon  the  back  of  the  nomad’s  beast  of 
burden,  diluted  for  centuries  in  memoirs  without  any 
sort  of  precision  and  mercilessly  condensed,  the  proto- 
Chaldean  narratives  have  given  us  the  first  twelve 
chapters  of  Genesis,  and  there  is  not,  perhaps,  any  part 
of  the  Bible  which  has  had  more  important  conse- 
quences. Humanity  has  supposed  that  it  possessed  in 
them  an  historical  narrative  of  the  things  about  which 
it  was  most  anxious  to  know,  I mean  its  infancy  and 
early  progress.  The  very  real  good  sense  which  is  to 
be  found  at  the  root  of  these  symbols  would  make  us 
forget  what  there  is  defective  about  them.  Their 
mythological  side  was  to  serve  as  a passport  to  what 
is  superficially  reasonable  about  them.  Originally 
given  by  the  Hebrew  pundits  in  two  parallel  versions, 
but  afterwards  fused  into  one  single  text,  the  narra- 
tives in  question  have  become  the  necessary  prelimi- 
nary to  all  sacred  history. 

Owing  to  the  narrowness  of  Christian  dogmatism, 
these  semi-scientific  pages  were  in  the  Middle  Ages  a 
serious  obstacle  to  the  awakening  of  the  human  intellect. 


ANCIENT  BABYLONIAN  INFLUENCE. 


67 


The  whole  theory  of  the  universe  was  thought  to  be 
contained  in  the  six  days’  work.  Even  in  our  time, 
the  lack  of  criticism,  both  in  France  and  England, 
general  among  savants  who  concern  themselves  solely 
with  physical  and  mathematical  sciences,  has  caused  a 
great  deal  of  nonsense  to  be  written  upon  this  subject. 
It  must  not  be  forgotten,  however,  that  the  chapter 
Bereshith  was  science  for  the  day  in  which  it  was 
written.  The  old  Babylonian  spirit  breathes  in  it 
still.  The  succession  of  the  creations  and  ages  of  the 
world,  the  idea  that  the  world  has  a growth,  a history, 
in  which  each  state  proceeds  from  the  previous  state 
by  an  organic  development,  was  an  immense  advance 
upon  a level  theory  of  the  universe,  conceived  as  a 
material  and  lifeless  aggregate.  The  factitious  sim- 
plicity of  the  Bible  narrative,  the  exaggerated  aver- 
sion which  its  pages  exhibit  for  big  figures  and  lengthy 
periods,  have  masked  the  powerful  evolutionary  spirit 
which  lies  at  the  bottom  of  it ; but  the  genius  of  the 
unknown  Darwins  whom  Babylon  possessed  4,000 
years  ago  is  always  found  in  it.  The  eloquent  words, 
“ In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heaven  and  the 
earth,”  was  like  the  cold  mistral  which  cleared  the 
sky,  like  the  sweep  of  the  broom  which  drove  away 
beyond  our  horizon  the  chimeras  which  darkened  it. 
A free  will,  as  implied  by  the  words  “He  created,” 
substituted  for  ten  thousand  capricious  fancies,  is  a 
progress  of  its  kind.  The  great  truth  of  the  unity  of  the 
world  and  of  the  absolute  solidarity  of  all  its  various 
parts,  which  polytheism  failed  to  appreciate,  is  at  least 


68  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

clearly  perceived  in  these  narratives,  in  which  all  parts 
of  nature  bring  forth  by  the  action  of  the  same  thought 
and  the  effect  of  the  same  creative  Word. 

The  nomad  herder  would  not  have  invented  these 
strangle  stories ; but  he  has  caused  them  to  live. 
Chaldean  cosmogony  would  never  have  conquered  the 
world  in  the  exuberant  form  which  it  assumed  in  the 
Assyrian  texts  ; its  simplification  by  the  Semitic  genius 
was  effected  just  at  the  very  time  when  the  human 
intellect  was  craving  clear  ideas  upon  a subject  of 
which  nothing  clear  can  be  known. 

Everything  repeats  itself  in  the  history  of  the 
human  intellect.  In  this  instance,  the  dried  herba- 
rium was  more  fruitful  than  the  verdant  field.  Mon- 
strosities which  would  have  remained  buried  in  the 
heap  of  Oriental  balderdash,  have  become  palpable 
realities.  The  clear  and  sober  imagination  of  Israel 
has  effected  this  miracle.  What  reads  as  grotesque 
in  Berosus  appears  in  the  Bible  narrative  so  true 
and  so  natural,  that  we,  with  our  Western  credulity, 
have  treated  it  as  history,  and  have  imagined,  when 
we  adopted  these  fables,  that  we  have  been  discarding 
mythology. 


CHAPTEK  VI, 


THE  NAME  OF  IAHVEH. 

It  is  very  possible  that  the  long  history  of  religion, 
which,  starting  from  the  nomad’s  tent,  has  resulted 
in  Christianity  or  Islamism,  derives  from  primitive 
Assyria,  or  from  Accadian  Assyria,  as  it  is  called, 
another  element  of  capital  importance;  that  is,  the 
name  of  Iahoue  or  Iahveh .*  This  proper  name  is,  in 

the  theology  of  the  nomad  Semites,  a strange  misuse  of 
terms.  Why  should  a proper  name  be  given  to  one  who 

* The  pronunciation  Jehovah  has  only  been  used  since  the  seven- 
teenth century.  It  constitutes  a regular  impossibility,  inasmuch  as 
the  vowels  niiTj  are  taken  from  the  word  >3tTN.  There  would,  if 
we  are  guided  by  the  Massoretic  text,  be  as  good  reason  for  saying 
Jehovih,  as  the  Massoretes  punctuate  niiT  wherever  the  text  runs 
mrp  >'3'TN-  This  is  what  is  called  a perpetual  keri ; this  presents 
no  difficulty  when  we  remember  that  in  the  first  half  of  the  Middle 
Ages  there  was  no  compound  sheva.  Let  us  imagine  that  it  was 
compulsory  to  substitute  the  name  of  Lutece  for  Paris ; would 
that  legitimise  the  form  of  Purese  ? The  real  vowels  of  nirP 
are  unknown.  The  ancients  transcribed  IEY12,  IAOY,  IAO ; 
Clement  of  Alexandria  gives  ’Iaoue ; Theodoretus  tells  us  that  the 
Samaritans  pronounced  IABE.  St.  Epiphany  adopts  the  same 
form.  St.  Jerome  gives  Iaho  (see  the  texts  collected  by  Gesenius, 
Thes.,  p.  577).  We  find  also  IE  YE  (Stade,  Z.,  1881,  p.  846;  1882, 
pp.  173,  174).  The  form  Iahveh  or  Iahweh  seems  therefore  accu- 
rately to  represent  the  pronunciation  of  at  least  the  fourth  century 
of  our  era. 


7° 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


has  no  congener,  who  is  alone  of  his  kind  ? The  name 
was  in  all  probability  borrowed  by  these  peoples  from 
abroad.  Nothing  goes  to  show  that  lahveh  was  indi- 
genous to  Egypt.  In  Assyria,  upon  the  contrary, 
and  especially  in  the  Chaldean  countries  bordering 
upon  Padan-Aram,  the  word  Iahou  or  lahveh  seems 
to  have  been  employed  to  designate  God.*  The  root 
hawa,  written  with  a soft  h or  a hard  h; j*  signifies  in 
the  Aramaic  tongue,  the  being,  the  breath,  or  the 
life,  something  analogous  to  rouah.  The  mother  of 
life,  the  first  woman,  was  called  Hawwa ; the  master 
of  life,  the  supreme  being,  may  have  been  called 
Iahwa.  This  name  was  more  especially  used  when 
speaking  of  the  god  who  presided  over  the  greatest  of 
nature’s  phenomena,  the  thunder.  The  Semite  herds- 
men, it  seems,  were  much  struck  by  this,  and  came  to 
regard  Iahoaa  as  synonymous  with  El  or  Elohim.  The 
Canaanites,  or  at  all  events  the  Hamathites,  adopted 
the  same  synonym.  We  find  the  Jews  having  a king 
called  Io-iaqm  and  El-iaqim , while  in  Hamath  we 
find  a king  named  Iahiibid  and  llubid.% 

The  holy  name  became  contracted  into  lahou  or  Jo, 
and  was  shortened  to  Iah.  Put  the  Mesa  inscrip- 

* Schrader,  pp.  23  and  following.  The  classic  IAO  is  always 
considered  by  the  Greeks  to  be  of  Assyrian  origin. 

t The  distinction  between  those  two  articulations  scarcely 
existed  before  the  invention  of  writing.  Even  after  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  alphabet,  the  n and  the  n were  often  confounded  in 
sound  and  in  the  way  in  which  they  were  formed.  See  above, 
note  *,  p.  68. 

I Schrader. 


THE  NAME  OF  IAHVEH.  71 

lion,*  which  dates  from  about  875  b.c.,  gives  the  name 
mrp  written  in  four  letters  as  in  classic  Hebrew.  Even 
from  this  epoch,  moreover,  the  tetragrammaton  was 
explained  by  the  verb  Jiaia,  which  is  the  Hebraic  form 
of  hawa:  “I  am  he  that  I am,”  and  “I  am”  became 
a regular  substantive.f  In  this  way  a metaphysical 
meaning  was  arrived  at,  without  much  departure,  per- 
haps, from  the  primitive  meaning. 

Let  me  hasten  to  add  that  all  these  points  are  sur- 
rounded by  the  gravest  doubts.  We  shall  see,  as  we 
proceed,  that  it  is  also  very  possible  that  Iahveh  was 
the  local  god  of  Sinai  or  the  provincial  god  of  Pales- 
tine. X Of  all  the  obscure  questions  in  these  ancient 
histories,  this  assuredly  is  the  most  hopeless.  These 
proper  names  of  Iahveh,  of  Chemosh,  which  the  Syro- 
Arabian  peoples  gave  to  their  supreme  god,  are  quite 
an  insoluble  problem.  My  opinion  is  that  the  patri- 
archal elohism  is  to  be  regarded  as  anterior  and 
superior  to  Iahveism,  to  Camosism,  &c.  It  was  an 
immense  advantage  that  the  gods  had  only  a generic 
name,  removing  all  idea  of  personality.  It  may  be 
regarded  as  a step  in  advance,  too,  when  these  elohim , 
unified  in  one  single  Elohim,  acted  as  one  single 
being.  But  it  was  a step  backward  when  they  had  a 
proper  name,  such  as  Camos , Ialiveli , Rimmon , and  con- 
stituted for  each  people  a jealous,  egoistical,  and  per- 

* Line  18. 

t Exodus,  ch.  iii. , v.  14,  Jehovist ; Exodus,  ch.  vi,  v.  2,  3, 
Elohist. 

t See  pp.  101,  102,  158  and  following,  194. 


72  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

sonal  god.  The  people  of  Israel  alone  corrected  the 
defects  of  its  national  god,  suppressed  his  proper 
name,  and  brought  it  to  be  only  a synonym  of 
Elohim. 

The  story  of  this  slow  transformation,  which  was  a 
reversion  to  the  primitive  patriarchal  state,  will  be 
the  subject  of  this  history.  For  the  present  it  will  be 
sufficient  to  point  out  that  Iahveh  plays  no  important 
part  in  the  history  of  Israel  until  Israel  has  become  a 
nation  attached  to  one  soil.  The  religious  progress  of 
Israel  will  be  found  to  consist  in  reverting  from  Iahveh 
to  Elohim,  in  modifying  Iahveh,  and  in  stripping  him 
of  his  personal  attributes  and  leaving  him  only  the 
abstract  existence  of  Elohim.  Iahveh  is  a special  god, 
the  god  of  a human  family  and  of  a country  ; as  such 
he  is  neither  better  nor  worse  than  the  other  pro- 
tecting deities.  Elohim  is  the  universal  God,  the  God 
of  the  human  race.  In  reality  it  is  to  Elohim  and 
not  to  Iahveh  that  the  world  has  been  converted. 
The  world  has  become  deist,  that  is  to  say  elohist,  and 
not  iahveist.  It  has  forgotten  how  the  name  of  Iahveh 
is  pronounced ; each  people  will  continue  to  place  the 
vowels  in  its  own  way.  Neither  Christianity  nor 
Islamism  know  Iahveh.  It  is  a word  entirely  elimi- 
nated from  pious  use ; it  is  the  name  of  a barbarian 
and  foreign  god. 

The  pantheon  of  these  wandering  peoples,  reduced 
to  preserving  ancient  words  in  default  of  ancient 
images,  contained  in  this  way  a host  of  uncompre- 
liended  vocables  which  were  in  turn  used  or  cast  aside 


THE  NAME  OF  IAHVEH. 


73 


by  the  religious  mode  of  the  day,  and  which  came  like 
spectres  upon  the  imagination.  Sebaoth  is  assuredly 
one  of  the  most  peculiar  of  these  ancient  divine  names 
which  have  become  enigmas.  The  expression  “ S ebaoth" 
to  denote  the  Divinity  appears  to  proceed  from  the 
same  order  of  ideas  as  elohim.  The  word  sebaoth  sig- 
nifies “ the  armies,  the  series,  the  orders  ” of  creatures, 
and  especially  of  celestial  creatures,  of  stars,  of  angels. 
It  corresponds  to  the  word  dlamin  (“  the  worlds  ”)  of 
the  Koran,  which  is  itself  the  Hebrew  olam  (the  Phoe- 
nician oulom ),  translated  in  the  Gnostic  and  Jewish 
Greek  by  Alwv*  All  this,  it  will  be  observed,  does 
not  differ  much  from  the  Babylonian  ideas.  Sebaoth 
means  “ the  worlds,”  as  Elohim  means  “the  forces.” 
Sebaoth , like  Elohim , becomes  a collective  singular,  or 
rather  a plural  reduced  to  the  signification  of  a sin- 
gular, designating  the  Supreme  Being,  after  having 
designated  the  series  of  beings.  Sebaoth , used  by  itself, 
was  synonymous  with  God ; Sebaoth  was  equivalent  to 
Elohim , and  when  Iahveh  took  to  himself  all  the  divine 
names,  he  also  took  that  of  Sebaoth, | without  any 
fresh  shade  of  meaning  entering  into  the  Hebrew  con- 
ception of  Providence,  to  so  great  an  extent  was  this 

* Hebrews,  ck.  i.,  v.  2. 

•f-  The  expression  nifcQS  7T)iT  is  familiar  to  the  prophets  of  the 
eighth  century  b.c.,  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and  Micah.  In  other  parts 
of  the  Prophets  and  in  the  Psalms  it  seems  to  have  become  so  by 
force  of  imitation.  It  is  a poetic  expression  which  the  very  ancient 
narratives  do  not  contain.  The  expression  VlkM  nirP 

belongs  to  a period  in  which  the  ancient  meaning  was  not 
understood,  and  in  which  it  was  considered  grammatically  cor* 
rect  to  say,  Iahveh  (God  of  the)  Sebaoth. 


74  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

conception  the  very  base,  the  limit,  and  the  expression 
of  the  genius  of  these  peoples. 

The  religious  institutions  of  Babylon  were  hardly 
of  a character  to  be  imitated  by  nomads.  The  Sab- 
bath, or  the  seventh  day’s  rest,  was  perhaps  the 
Chaldean  institution  which  astonished  the  Semites 
more  than  any  other.  For  the  Bedouin,  with  no  regular 
hours  of  work,  life  was  a perpetual  Sabbath.  In  a land 
where  public  works,  executed  by  forced  labour,  had 
been  carried  very  far,  a period  of  rest  seemed  neces- 
sary, in  the  interests  both  of  the  master  and  the  slave. 
The  number  seven  played  a very  important  part  in 
Babylonian  ideas,  and  the  period  of  seven  days,  recur- 
ring four  times  in  a lunar  month,  marked  divisions  of 
time  corresponding  very  closely  with  human  strength. 
Let  me  add  that  the  number  six  was  the  basis  of 
Babylonian  numeration,  so  that  6x1  represented  very 
much  what  12x1  does  to  us.  The  seventh  was  some- 
thing supererogatory  and  unclassed,  like  the  thirteenth 
with  us.  The  Sabbath  is  thus  an  institution  of  a very 
advanced  stage  of  civilisation,  not  a patriarchal  usage. 
It  doubtless  formed  part  of  the  first  relay  of  customs 
brought  from  Chaldsea  by  the  patriarchs.  The  nomads 
only  adopted  it  at  first  so  far  as  it  suited  them,  and  it 
was  not  until  much  later,  and  in  a social  condition  of 
quite  a different  kind,  that  they  made  further  progress 
upon  this  point. 

A very  characteristic  fact  it  is  that  the  nomads,  who 
adopted  so  many  Chaldean  institutions,  did  not  take  the 
division  of  the  day  into  twenty-four  hours.  Up  to  the 


THE  NAME  OF  IAHVEH. 


75 


Grreco-Roman  period,  the  Jews  divided  the  day  just 
like  the  Arabs,  that  is  to  say  into  characteristic 
periods.*  The  word  saa , “ hour,”  does  not  exist  in 
ancient  Hebrew.  With  regard  to  the  measures  of 
weight,  length,  and  capacity,  the  nomad  Semites,  like 
the  whole  of  the  old  world,  knew  of  no  others  but 
those  established  by  Babylon. j* 

* Nehemiah,  ch.  vii.,  v.  3. 

t Researches  of  Bceckli,  Brandis,  and  Six. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


THE  HEBREW  OR  TERACHITE  GROUP. 

The  Euphrates  may  be  regarded  as  the  high  road  of 
the  nomad  Semites  who  came  in  contact  with  Assyria. 
Ascending  its  course  in  a north-westerly  direction,  they 
reached  the  city  of  Harran,  which  was,  as  it  were, 
their  rallying  point.  From  there  a great  number  of 
them  came  hack  to  the  Euphrates,  which  they  crossed 
at  Thapsacus  or  Beredjik,  then  entering  upon  the 
Syrian  deserts,  to  the  east  of  the  Antilibanus,  regions 
singularly  bare  in  the  eye  of  the  dweller  in  cities, 
but  very  suitable  for  the  rearing  of  flocks  and  herds. 
They  were  particularly  fond  of  the  land  of  Us  or  Aus, 
now  the  dwelling-place  of  the  Anezis,  the  land  of 
Terach  (the  Trachonitides),  the  region  of  Damascus, 
and  the  south  of  Palestine,  to  which  the  Canaanites 
had  not  penetrated.  They  never  went  near  the  coast, 
and  probably  had,  like  the  Arabs,  an  aversion  for 
the  sea,  regarding  it  as  so  much  abstracted  from 
creation.* 

These  tribes,  first  of  all  trans-Euphratian,  which  had 
become,  by  crossing  the  stream,  cis-Euphratian,  took 

* In  the  Apocalypse  (ch.  xxi.,  v.  1),  one  of  the  characteristics 
of  the  world  made  perfect  is  to  be  the  disappearance  of  the  sea 


THE  HEBREW  OR  TERACHITE  GROUP. 


77 


the  generic  name  of  Hebrew  ( Ibrim , “those  of  the 
other  side  ”),  though  we  do  not  know  whether  they 
took  it  when  they  placed  the  Euphrates  between  them- 
selves and  their  brethren  who  remained  in  the  Pad- 
dan-Aram,  or  whether  it  was  the  Canaanites  who 
called  them  “those  from  beyond,”  or,  to  be  more 
accurate,  “ those  who  had  crossed  the  river.”* * * §  These 
Ibrim , in  any  event,  appear  to  have  been  closely  allied 
to  the  Arphaxadites  (people  of  the  mountainous  pro- 
vince to  the  north  of  Nineveh),  to  the  town  of  Paliga, 
near  Circesium,  to  the  towns  of  Ragho,  Sarug,  and 
Nahor,  not  far  from  the  Euphrates,  j*  Then  we  find 
them,  by  a sudden  bound,  transported  to  the  Tracho- 
nitides,^:  to  the  south-east  of  Damascus,  and  in  the 
region  of  the  Hauran.  Great  as  may  be  the  distance 
which  separates  them  from  the  Paddan-Aram,  their 
eyes  are  never  removed  from  their  ancient  country, 
and  more  especially  from  Harran.§ 

The  Terachite  family  was  destined  to  be  still  further 
deeply  divided,  but  it  never  lost  the  sense  of  its  unity. 
It  was  this  family  above  all  others  which  jealously  pre- 
served the  religion  of  Ur-Casdim,  and  stoutly  adhered 
to  its  claim  of  Ab-Orham  as  its  supreme  father.  The 
unvarying  tradition  was  that  Terach,  the  father  of  the 

* Genesis,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  13;  Septuagint,  6 Trcpcmjs ; Aquila, 
6 TrcpouTTjs.  Mythic  eponym ; Eber. 

f Genesis,  ch.  xi. 

I rnn  = Tpa^wv.  I think  that  pn  stands  for  pin,  the 
Hauran. 

§ The  life  of  Jacob  is  still  half-way  between  the  Padan-Aram, 
and  Syria  properly  so  called.  Genesis,  ch.  xxiv.,  xxvii.,  xxviii, 

H 2 


78  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


race,  was  a native  of  Ur-Casdim,  and  that  Ab-Orham 
was  his  son.  This  Ab-Orham  was  represented  some- 
times as  a man,  sometimes  as  a god.  The  tribes  origin- 
ally ascribed  to  him  the  part  of  supreme  ancestor  and 
divine  patriarch.  The  Hebrews  pronounced  his  name 
Abraham , which  they  interpreted  u Father  of  many  na- 
tions ; ”*  hut  they  often  changed  this  name  to  Ab-Ram , 
“the  mighty  Father,”  to  obtain  a meaning  more  in  con- 
formity with  the  past  which  was  ascribed  to  him.  He 
was  a pacific  and  humane  father.  It  was  related  how, 
when  it  was  his  duty  to  sacrifice  his  first-born  son,  he 
substituted  for  him  a ram.f  It  was  an  honour  to  have 
for  one’s  ancestor  so  great  a civiliser,  a man  who  had 
been  in  communion  with  El  or  Iahou.  Damascus  also 
reckoned  Abraham  among  its  fabled  kings, } and  if  that 
is  borrowed  from  the  Biblical  traditions,  it  is  pro- 
bably a plagiarism  of  very  ancient  date. 

To  be  of  Ur-Casdim  descent  became,  in  the  eyes 
of  all  Hebrews,  a title  of  high  nobility.  The  Israelite 
Hebrews  have  reached  so  great  a celebrity  in  history 
that  they  have  absorbed  altogether  the  name  of 
Hebrews ; but,  originally,  this  name  applied  to  many 
other  peoples.  The  Ammonites,  the  Edomites,  and 
the  Moabites  claimed  Abraham  as  their  common  ances- 
tor. They  felt  themselves  still  to  be  brethren  in  the 

* Genesis,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  5 (Elohist). 

t See  above,  pp.  68,  64. 

t Nicholas  of  Damascus,  in  Jos.,  Ant.  I.,  vii.,  2 ; Justin,  xxxvi., 
v.  2.  Berosus  does  not  mention  Abraham  by  name ; but  accord- 
ing to  Josephus  he  designates  him  without  naming  him. 


THE  HEBREW  OR  TERACHITE  GROUP.  79 

strictest  sense  of  the  word.  This  fraternity  was  at 
times  irksome  to  the  Israelites,  who  were  so  often  dis- 
dainful of  their  congeners.  Ammon,  Edom,  Moab, 
and  Ishmael  are  connected  with  the  Father  of  the 
peoples  by  insulting  not  to  say  obscene  legends.* * * § 
13 ut  a thousand  historical  incidents  treasured  up  in 
the  memory  of  Israel  spoke  more  loudly  than  hatred, 
and  proved  that  all  these  peoples  were  connected  with 
one  another  by  the  tie  of  a close  relationship. 

The  religious  resemblance  between  them  was  par- 
ticularly striking.  The  religion  of  the  Moabites  and 
that  of  the  Edomites  unquestionably  differed  but  little 
at  first  from  that  of  the  Israelites. ^ Edom,  more 
particularly,  had  from  the  very  first  a school  of  sages ; 
that  of  Theman,^;  in  which  the  problem  of  man’s  des- 
tiny was  discussed  from  the  standpoint  of  the  mono- 
theistic philosophy  of  the  Hebrews,  and  in  which  it 
was  sought  to  give  a meaning  to  life  by  admitting 
only  two  fundamental  principles  : an  eternal  God  and 
fleeting  man.§  The  numerous  Arab  tribes  devoted  to 
the  worship  of  El,  Ishmaelites,  Adabelites,  Bethuelites, 
Eaguelites,  Jeramelites,  Malkielites,  Iahlelites,  Iah- 


* Genesis,  ch.  xvi.,  xvii.,  xix.,  xxv.,  xxxvi. 

t Ruth  and  the  episode  of  Balaam  do  not  denote  any  religious 
difference  between  the  Moabites  and  the  Israelites. 

| Somewhere  about  Petra. 

§ The  Book  of  Job,  composed  by  an  Israelite,  but  with  the  in- 
tention of  presenting  a Themanite  ideal.  The  attention  of  the 
author  to  local  colour  does  not  admit  of  the  supposition  that  he 
would  have  attributed  the  monotheistic  philosophy  to  these  peoples, 
if  such  had  not  been  the  doctrine  of  the  wise  men  of  the  country. 


8o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


selites,  Iemuelites,* * * §  Midianites,t  Kenites,  Calebites 
or  Calbelites,§  Kenizzites,||  Ausites,^[  Beni-Qedem  or 
Saracens,**  who  roamed  or  trafficked  in  these  Syrian 
deserts  and  in  the  North  of  Arabia,  then  far  more 
busy  with  life  than  they  are  to-day,  had  probably  no 
other  theology.  Lastly,  the  episodes  of  Melchisedech, 
priest  of  El- Elion,  and  of  Abimelech  of  Geraar,  though 
not  possessing  a clearly  historical  character,  demon- 
strate the  existence  of  a wide  zone  of  comparatively 
pure  worship  at  the  junction  of  the  Arabian  and 
Syrian  deserts. 

The  Hebrews,  as  they  spread  through  the  eastern 
parts  of  Syria,  encountered  therefore,  wherever  they 
went,  populations  having  a strong  analogy  with  them- 

* Note  these  forms:  ibNyBBFS  '•bN'oba*  ‘'bssnN 

'bffinr,  parallel  to  and  which  would  seem  to  infer 

'bsspUN  'bNpnSN  ''bMSDY'.  S ee  Ptevue  des  etudes  juives,  Oct.-Dec., 
1882,  pp.  162  and  following.  bsniN,  bsirD,  are  certainly 

also  the  names  of  tribes.  It  is  the  same  with  bNlt2\  son  of  Simeon. 
Magdiel  and  Mehetabel  are  probably  names  of  the  same  kind.  Note 
pp,  the  imaginary  eponym  of  the  Kenites,  Numbers,  ch.  xxvi.,  v. 
22;  Judges,  ch.  iv.,  v.  11.  Comp.  CEst.  Monatsschrift,  Nov.,  1884, 
p.  279. 

t Relations  of  Moses  with  Jethro  and  Midian  (Exodus,  ch.  xviii., 
v.  1 to  12),  a very  ancient  fragment.  Jethro  is  probably  an  Arab 
form  with  a final  vowel. 

+ The  Kenites  (which  stood  perhaps  for  Kenielites,  bs^p)  are 
Arabs,  not  Canaanites.  They  were  always  on  very  good  terms 
with  Israel. 

§ See  pp.  89  and  90  below. 

||  tap  stands  perhaps  for  bstap. 

Compatriots  of  Job,  supposed  to  be  monotheist. 

**  Orientals,  generic  name  of  the  nomad  Arabs  to  the  east  of 
Palestine  (land  of  the  Anezis). 


THE  HEBREW  OR  TE  RAC  HITE  GROUP. 


81 


selves.  The  Ishmaelites,  the  Midianites,  and  a whole 
series  of  Arab  tribes  grouped  under  the  names  of 
Cethura  and  Agar,* * * §  were  classed  as  Abrahamites.  All 
these  peoples  belonged  to  different  branches  of  one 
and  the  same  genealogical  tree  ; they  understood  each 
other’s  dialects  ; their  manners  and  customs  were  much 
the  same.  They  formed  one  vast  brotherhood,  from 
Harran  to  the  Negeb  (Southern  Palestine) ; all  these 
scattered  groups  treated  one  another  as  brethren, 
and  aided  one  another  like  members  of  one  dispersed 
family.f 

The  relations  of  the  Terachites  with  the  Canaanites 
were,  upon  the  contrary,  very  unfriendly,  though  they 
spoke  a similar  language,  and  doubtless  belonged  to 
the  same  race.  In  after  years  the  Hebrews,  out  of 
their  great  hatred,  denied  this  latter  fact,  $ but  the 
community  of  language,  § without  any  conquest  of  the 
country  to  explain  it,  is  a consideration  which  must 
take  precedence  of  any  other.  The  Canaanites  and  the 
Terachites  were  closely  related,  and  there  were  times 

* Hagar  is  the  Arabia  Petrsea  (^sr  , Koran,  xv.),  by  the  primitive 
equivalence  of  n and  n*  Cf.  Cnan>  Psalm,  lxxxiii.,  v.  7 ; 1 
Chronicles,  ch.  v.,  v.  10,  19,  20;  Paul  to  the  Galatians,  ch.  iv., 
v.  24,  25;  'Aypaioi  of  Eratosthenes  (Strabo,  XVI.,  iv.,  2). 

t See  the  exquisite  idyls  in  ch.  xxiv.  and  xxix.  of  Genesis. 

| Genesis,  ch.  x.,  where  the  Canaanites  are  traced  back  to 
Ham,  doubtless  because,  at  the  time  this  ethnographical  table  was 
compiled,  the  Canaanites  were  already  Egyptianised  in  habits  and 
civilisation. 

§ The  Phoenician  language  only  differed  from  the  Hebrew  in 
Blight  dialectic  respects.  See  Corpus  inscr.  semit.,  part  i. 


82  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


when  the  enlightened  Israelites  would  admit  this ; * * * § 
but  the  Hebrew  character  and  mode  of  life  differed 
totally  from  those  of  the  Canaanites.j*  The  Hebrews 
remained  for  a long  time  nomads  and  pastors,  and  even 
when  established  they  always  preserved  the  patriarchal 
type  of  life  and  their  aversion  for  large  towns  with 
regular  buildings  and  organised  states. 

There  is  no  doubt  one  hypothesis  which  cannot  be 
rejected  as  impossible.  The  ancient  critics  clung  to  it, 
and  the  recent  epigraphic  discoveries  have  lent  a cer- 
tain air  of  probability  to  it.  It  is  that  according  to 
which  the  Abrahamites,  before  entering  the  land  of 
Canaan,  spoke  Aramaic,  and  upon  entering  that  land 
adopted  the  language  of  the  country,  that  is  to  say, 
Hebrew.  X When  we  find  the  Arabian  desert  furnish- 
ing only  Aramaic  inscriptions^  some  of  which  date 
from  the  most  remote  antiquity,  we  are  led  to  imagine 
that  the  Abrahamites  at  first  spoke  the  same  dialect, 
which  we  find  upon  these  ancient  stelae  left  by  nomads 
who  appear  to  have  resembled  them  very  closely.  || 

* Isaiah,  ch.  xix.,  v.  18,  speaks  of  the  Hebrew  as  “ the  language 
of  Canaan.” 

t Judges,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  7. 

I Isaiah,  see  above. 

§ Notices  et  Extraits,  \ ol.  xviii.,  part  i. ; Revue  d'arcTuzolorjis, 
orientale,  1st  year,  pp.  41  and  following.  Compare  with  the  epi- 
graphic collection  of  Sina'i,  Safa,  the  Nabatheans,  and  Palmyra, 
which  will  be  found  in  the  second  part  of  the  Corpus  inscr.  semit. 

||  Note  the  very  striking  expression  -qn  'DIN  (Deut.,  ch. 
xxvi.,  v.  5).  “ Wandering  Aramean  ” applied  to  the  ancestors  of  the 
Hebrew  people.  Salm  Sezab  of  the  Te'ima  inscription  is  in  reality 
an  Arammi  obed,  a nomad  patriarch,  speaking  Aramaic. 


THE  HEBREW  OR  TE RAC  HITE  GROUP.  83 

Seductive  as  such,  a theory  may  he,  it  is  one  which 
cannot  be  accepted ; for  the  change  of  language  which 
in  that  case  must  have  occurred  among  the  Beni-Israel 
must  also  be  imagined  to  have  taken  place,  and  for  the 
same  reason,  among  the  Moabites  and  Edomites.  The 
Moabites  unquestionably  spoke  the  same  language  as 
the  Israelites.*  It  would  have  to  be  supposed,  too, 
that  Moab  and  Israel  came  to  an  agreement  to  change 
their  language  at  the  same  moment.  If  it  is  ad- 
missible that  the  Beni-Israel,  in  their  close  contact 
with  the  Canaanites,  came  to  adopt  the  latter’s  lan- 
guage, that  could  not  have  been  the  case  with  Moab, 
Edom,  and  Ammon,  who  did  not  appear  to  have  taken 
the  place  of  any  previous  Canaanite  populations.  Moab, 
Edom,  Ammon,  Israel,  Canaan  spoke  then  the  same 
language  from  a community  of  origin,  which  consti- 
tuted a somewhat  close  relationship,  and  not  as  the 
outcome  of  changes  resulting  from  emigration  or 
conquest. 

With  regard  to  the  Aramaic-speaking  populations, 
if  we  were  to  go  by  grammar  alone,  we  should  imagine 
them  to  be  separated  from  the  Hebrews  by  a deep  gulf, 
dating  from  thousands  of  years.  But  the  race  sympathy 
is  also  a factor  which  has  to  be  taken  into  account. 
Laban,  the  father  of  the  pastors  who  spoke  Aramaic, 
is  in  the  closest  relationship  with  the  Isaakites  and  the 
Israelites.  Marriages  between  these  two  are  constantly 
taking  place.  They  all  of  them  inhabit  the  same 

* The  Mesa  inscription,  not  to  speak  of  many  other  Biblical 
proofs. 


8+  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


grazing  ground,  from  Euphrates  to  the  sea,  the  coast 
only  excepted ; they  play  each  other  all  sorts  of  ill- 
natured  tricks,  which  do  not  lead  to  an  absolute  rup- 
ture. When  the  separation  made  further  progress, 
Galeed  is  the  limit  of  Aramean  and  of  Hebrew.*  A 
gal  or  men-hir  indicated  the  line  of  demarcation,  being 
called  Galeed  by  the  Hebrew-speaking  populations  of 
the  south  and  west,  and  Iegar  Sahadouta  by  the  Ara- 
means  of  Damascus.  Laban  and  Jacob  swear  according 
to  the  same  rite,  erecting  a tumulus  and  eating  bread 
upon  it.  The  “heap  of  witness”  is  to  remind  the 
Hebrews  and  the  Arameans  that  they  have  given  their 
daughters  to  each  other  in  marriage,  that  they  have 
the  same  ancestors  and  the  same  God,  and  that  this 
God  is  the  God  of  Abraham,  the  “fear  of  Isaac.” 

The  difference,  then,  between  the  Hebrews  and  the 
Canaanites  was  much  more  marked  than  between  the 
various  nomad  families  compared  with  one  another. 
Nevertheless,  among  these  populations  vaguely  con- 
founded under  the  name  Canaan,  several  had  great 
analogy  with  the  Hebrews,  and  especially  with  the 
Israelites.  Thus,  for  instance,  the  Giblites  (inhabit- 
ants of  Byblus  and  Berytus),  who  formed  in  Phoe- 
nicia a settlement  apart,  *j*  adored  JSl,  and  had,  in  a 

* Genesis,  cb.  xxxi.,  v.  43  and  following,  a beautiful  ethno- 
graphical myth,  written  with  the  clear  purpose  of  its  double 
meaning, 

f See  the  systematic  and  exaggerated  but  nevertheless  true 
demonstration  of  Movers,  Die  phcen.  Alt.,  I.,  pp.  103  and  following. 
Also  Miss,  de  Phen.,  pp.  214,  215.  It  is  worthy  of  remark 
that  Gebal  is  not  included,  in  Genesis  x.,  among  the  sons  of 
Canaan. 


THE  HEBREW  OR  TER  AC  HITE  GROUP.  85 

religious  sense,  the  closest  analogy  with  the  Israelites. 
Their  dialect  resembled  Hebrew  far  more  than  that  of 
the  Canaanites  properly  so  called.  The  stela  of  Ie- 
haumelek,  King  of  Byblus,*  might  be,  except  for  the 
divine  names  on  it,  the  stela  of  a king  of  Jerusalem. 

The  linguistic  geography  of  Syria  was  from  this 
date  forward  settled  for  a long  time  to  come.  The 
language  which  we  call  Hebrew,  characterised  by  the 
article  h , the  status  constructus , the  plural  in  im,  the 
absence  of  emphatic  terminations,  the  interior  passives, 
was  spoken  all  along  the  coast  from  Aradus  to  Jaffa, 
&c.,  in  the  whole  of  Palestine  and  Celesyria  as  far  as 
Hamath.  Aramaic  was  spoken  at  Damascus,  upon  the 
slopes  of  Antilibanus,  in  the  region  of  Aleppo,  in  the 
Paddan-Aram,  and  in  the  deserts  of  Northern  Arabia. 
Arabic  existed,  no  doubt,  with  all  its . grammatical 
refinements,  in  the  centre  of  Arabia,  near  Mecca ' 
but  it  was  quite  unknown  in  the  countries  of  which  I 
am  speaking.  Probably  the  Ishmaelites  and  the 
Cethurian  tribes  spoke  a Hebrew  or  Aramaic  dia- 
lect, and  not  Arabic  in  the  sense  applied  to  that  word 
since  Islamism  came  into  existence. "j* 

Phoenician  Hebrew  no  doubt  had  its  own  dialects. 
The  Terachite  peoples  must  all  have  used  nearly 
identical  idioms,^;  but  between  Hebrew  and  Phoeni- 
cian the  differences  were  very  real.  § It  is  more  than 

* Corpus  inscr.  semit.,  p.  i.,  No.  1. 

f Teima  inscription.  Rev.  d'Archeol.  orient.  See  above. 

J Mesa  inscription. 

§ Relative  pronouns  and  suffix  pronouns  slightly  different ; 
usage  of  vowels  entirely  distinct. 


86  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


probable,  nevertheless,  that  a Kanaan  and  an  Ibrl 
understood  each  other,  whereas  an  Ibri  and  an 
Arammi  would  not  have  done  so,  owing  to  the  diffi- 
culty which  the  unlettered  man  has  to  make  allowance 
for  varieties  of  dialect.  Though  not  equalling  the 
infinite  delicacy  of  the  Arabic  spoken  in  the  centre  of 
Arabia,  Hcbrew-Phcenician  possessed  a high  degree  of 
suppleness  and  perfection,  and  was  very  superior  to 
Aramaic,  the  heaviness  of  which  prevented  it  from 
ever  being  suitable  for  the  conveyance  of  original 
eloquence  and  poetry. 

A quiver  full  of  steel  arrows,  a cable  with  strong 
coils,  a trumpet  of  brass,  crashing  through  the  air 
with  two  or  three  sharp  notes,  such  is  Hebrew.  A 
language  of  this  kind  is  not  adapted  to  the  expression 
of  philosophic  thought,  or  scientific  result,  or  doubt, 
or  the  sentiment  of  the  infinite.  The  letters  of  its 
books  are  not  to  be  many ; but  they  are  to  be  letters 
of  fire.  This  language  is  not  destined  to  say  much, 
but  what  it  does  is  beaten  out  upon  an  anvil.  It  is 
to  pour  out  floods  of  anger,  and  utter  cries  of  rage 
against  the  abuses  of  the  world,  calling  the  four  winds 
of  heaven  to  the  assault  of  the  citadels  of  evil.  Like 
the  jubilee  horn  of  the  sanctuary,  it  will  be  put  to  no 
profane  use  ; it  will  never  express  the  innate  joy  of  the 
conscience  or  the  serenity  of  nature  ; but  it  will  sound 
the  note  of  the  holy  war  against  injustice  and  the  call 
to  the  great  assemblies  ; it  will  have  accents  of  rejoic- 
ing and  accents  of  terror ; it  will  become  the  clarion 
of  the  new-moon  festival,  or  the  trumpet  of  judgment. 


THE  HEBREW  OR  TERACHITE  GROUP.  87 

Fortunately,  the  Hellenic  genius  will  in  its  turn 
compose  for  the  expression  of  the  joys  and  sorrows  of 
the  soul  a seven -stringed  lute,  which  will  vibrate  in 
unison  with  what  is  human ; a great  organ  with  a 
thousand  pipes,  equal  to  the  harmonies  of  life.  For 
Greece  there  were  in  store  the  most  ravishing  of  joys, 
from  the  dance  in  chorus  upon  the  summits  of  the 
Taygetus  to  the  banquet  of  Aspasia,  from  the  smile  of 
Alcibiades  to  the  austerity  of  the  Portico,  from  the 
song  of  Anacreon  to  the  philosophical  drama  of  iEschy- 
lus  and  to  the  dreams  put  into  dialogue  by  Plato. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


THE  BENI-JACOB,  OR  BENI-ISRAEL. 

Among  these  nomad  tribes,  speaking  all  the  same 
language  and  professing  nearly  all  the  same  creeds, 
alliances  and  compacts  were  constantly  being  made 
and  unmade.*  It  was  not  an  uncommon  thing  for 
new  groups  to  be  formed  bearing  names  which  had 
not  been  heard  of  before.  Religion  was  generally 
the  cause  of  these  schisms.  A profound  instinct 
led  the  Hebrew  to  the  most  purified  form  of  religion, 
but  the  masses  were  not  capable  of  so  much  elevation, 
yielding  constantly  to  the  demoralising  influences 
from  outside.  The  human  sacrifices,  in  particular, 
must  have  led  to  frequent  secessions.  When  the 
masses,  terrified  by  some  imaginary  sign  of  divine 
wrath,  committed  their  first-born  to  the  flames,  the 
puritans  withdrew  rather  than  be  responsible  for  any 
such  horrible  proceeding.  The  idolatrous  practices 
also  provoked  severe  struggles.  To  raise  the  hand  to 
the  mouth  when  the  sun  or  moon  were  shining 
brightly  was  regarded  as  sacrilegious. f The  truly 
pious  men  swore  that  they  would  recognise  only 
El,  and  look  only  to  him  for  protection,  direction, 

* Teima  inscription,  Ftevue  d'archeol.  orientale,  first  year,  pp.  43 
and  following. 

f Job,  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  26  and  following. 


THE  BENI- J A COB,  OR  BENI-ISRA EL . 


89 


and  reward.  This  explains  why  there  are  so  many 
Hebrew  or  Arab  tribes  whose  name  marks  a special 
connection  with  El  :*  Ishmael,  11  he  who  in  El  answers 
favourably  ; ” Raguel , “ he  of  whom  El  is  the 
shepherd  or  friend ; ” Irliamel , “ him  on  whom  El  has 
pity ; ” Bethuel , and  Adabel , the  meaning  of  which  is 
obscure  ; with  the  ethnical  derivations  of  Ishmaeli, 
Irhameli,f  &c.  Often  with  names  of  this  kind,  El  was 
omitted,  Irham  being  used  instead  of  Irliamel ; Caleb 
instead  of  Calbel.%  This  last  name,  singular  as  it  is, 
need  not  create  any  surprise,  for  u Dog  of  El  ” was  an 
energetic  way  of  expressing  the  faithful  attachment  of 
a tribe  to  the  God  to  which  it  had  devoted  itself. § 

Among  the  tribes  thus  devoted  to  the  worship  of 
El,  and  which  were  connected  with  the  mythical 
Abraham  of  ITr-Casdim,  there  was  one  which  distin- 
guished itself  by  a sort  of  religious  gravity  and  scru- 
pulous attachment  to  the  supreme  God.  Its  name 
was  Israel,  the  meaning  of  which  word  was  doubtful, j| 

* See  above,  pp.  79,  80. 

t The  Jerahmelites  were  an  Arab  tribe  dwelling  to  the  south  of 
the  desert  of  Judah,  towards  the  Dead  Sea.  First  Book  of  Samuel, 
ch.  xxvii.,  v.  10 ; ch.  xxx.  v.  29.  They  are,  I believe,  the  Naha- 
thean  Geremelienses  of  Pozzuolo.  Corpus  inscr.  lat.,  vol.  x.,  parti., 
No.  1578;  Journal  asiat.,  Oct.,  1878,  p.  384. 

% The  form  exists  in  Phoenician.  See  Corpus  inscr. 

semit.,  part  i.,  Nos.  49,  52;  cf.  86.  Note  the  form  First 

Book  of  Chronicles,  ch.  ii. , v.  9,  and  the  intimate  connection  of  the 
Calebites  and  the  Jerahmelites. 

§ Compare  with  the  XoAxuSoe  or  Arabic  Coleib.  Journ.  asiat., 
Jan.,  1882,  p.  11.  The  title  “ dog  of  God  ” is  sometimes  taken 
as  an  honourable  one  by  certain  Mussulmans. 

||  The  etymology  in  Genesis,  ch.  xxxii.,  v.  28,  is  quite  fictitious. 


9° 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


though  it  unquestionably  indicated  the  submission 
under  which  this  family  was  towards  EL* 

A kind  of  synonym  of  Israel  was  Ialzobel^  “ He  whom 
El  rewards,”  or  “ He  who  follows  El,  who  marches 
step  by  step  in  the  ways  that  He  has  traced. ”:{:  This 

name  was  abridged  to  Jacob,  § as  that  of  Irhamel  was  to 
Irliam\\  orCalbel  to  Caleb.  Beni- Jacoby  or  Beni-lsrael 
was  the  name  of  the  tribe ; and  in  course  of  time  Jacob 
was  taken  to  be  a living  person,  grandson  of  Abraham. 
The  name  of  his  father  Isaak  is  probably  also  an  abbre- 
viation for  IsaaJcel , 11  He  upon  whom  God  smiles.” 

* The  distinction  of  £27  and  £27  did  not  exist  in  ancient  times.  It 
may  be,  therefore,  that  the  root  is  *l££\  The  meaning  would  be  “ He 
whom  El  directs  in  the  right  path,”  or  “ Rectitude  of  El.”  It  is 
certain  that  the  analogy  of  the  forms  crn\  FpV,  for 

bS2p37\  T'SCDY',  leads  one  to  suppose  a form 

for  This  form  crops  up  again,  perhaps,  in  the  title  of 

the  celebrated  book  -it£rn  ”!£D,  and  especially  in  the  caritative 
’I'PIP’*  of  the  ancient  canticles,  wrongly  written  C''”i££?''  in  one  of 
the  masal  of  Baalam  (Numbers,  ch.  xxiii.,  v.  10).  Compare  1 Chro- 
nicles, ch.  xxv.,  v.  14  and  the  variants.  Compare  Stade,  Zeitschrift, 
1885,  pp.  162,  163.  An  objection  to  the  explanation,  “ He  whom 
El  directs,”  is  that,  according  to  the  analogy  of  DpT'',  of  pj"!2\  of 
P|DT,»  the  •*  should  be  a prefix. 

t This  name  appears  in  the  list  of  the  campaigns  of  Tothmes 
HI.  (No.  102).  See  Groft  in  the  Pie v.  egyptol.,  vol.  iv.,  pp.  95 
and  following,  146  and  following ; Stade,  Zeitsch.  fur  die  altt. 
Wiss.,  1886,  pp.  1 and  following. 

\ Compare  with  rVQp37\  a very  plausible  correction. 

§ See  Mem.  upon  the  abbreviated  theophoric  names,  in  the 
Revue  des  etudes  juives,  Oct.-Dec.,  1882.  With  regard  to  rpV  for 
bSDDT',  see  p.  94  below.  We  find,  too,  in  the  Assyrian  text, 
VfcW''  for  Groff,  Revue  egypt.,  vol.  v.,  p.  87,  note  v. 

||  See  Gesenius,  Thes.,  p.  1283. 

^ Compare  with  Genesis,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  17,  19  ; ch.  xviii.,  v. 
12 ; ch.  xxi.,  v.  6;  ch.  xxvi.,  v.  8. 


THE  BENI- JACOB,  OR  BENI-ISRAEL. 


9i 


It  may  be  that  the  holy  tribe  was  so  designated  at  a 
certain  epoch ; or  the  Isaakel  may  perhaps  have  been 
a Puritan  group,  anterior  to  that  of  the  Jakobel. 
What  is  certain  is  that  these  pious  people  would  only 
call  the  Supreme  Being,  summed  up  in  Eloliim , El  or  El* 
elion  (the  most  High  God),f  or  Sadda'i  (the  Almighty 
God)4  At  the  epoch  of  the  internal  religious  struggles 
they  had  their  encampments  in  Palestine ; Bethel  was 
their  favourite  sanctuary.  The  altars,  or  rather  the 
pillars  § which  they  left  behind  them  were  called  El 
Elohe  Israel , “El  is  the  God  of  Israel.” 

We  can  see  at  once  the  analogy  between  a moral 
and  religious  condition  of  this  kind  and  that  of  the 
Mussulman.  It  was  a kind  of  prehistoric  Islam.  The 
Jakobelite  patriarch  was  a true  Moslem , one  who  gave 
himself  up  to  God,  who  made  of  God  the  centre  of  his 
life,  a devout  man  we  might  say,  were  it  not  that  in 
its  modern  meaning  this  term  implies  practices  which 
the  ancient  Semitic  Moslem  repudiated  with  horror.  The 
Israelite  tribe  seems,  then,  to  have  been  formed  by  a 
religious  motive,  and  to  have  had  a religious  standard. 
The  type  of  Abraham,  “the  friend  of  God,”  as  the 
Mussulmans  call  him,  stands  out  at  the  dawn  of 
Judaism  and  Islamism  as  the  ideal  of  grandiose  piety 

* El  has  not  the  same  root  as  Eloliim. 

f Genesis,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  18  and  following. 

| Genesis,  ch.  xxv.,  v.  11 ; ch.  xlviii.,  v.  3 and  following ; Exo- 
dus, ch.  vi.,  v.  2,  3. 

§ Genesis,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  20.  The  Jehovist  compiler  always 
makes  the  mistake  of  substituting  altars  for  pillars  in  the  old 
patriarchal  legends.  But  the  verb  wayyasseb,  which  he  uses, 
applies  rather  to  a pillar  than  an  altar. 

I 


9*  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

and  perfect  faith.  Abraham  is  a Moslem , but  he  is 
above  all  else  a Moumin , a believer,  a pious  hero,  a 
kind  of  Ali,  brave,  generous,  polygamous,  a man  of 
honour.  He  is  an  Arab  saint,  who  will  have  great 
difficulty  in  securing  his  place  among  the  monks,  the 
virgins,  and  the  ascetics,  more  Buddhist  than  Semitic, 
who  people  the  Christian  heaven. 

The  Beni-Israel,  in  conception  differing  but  little 
from  the  Jakobelites  and  the  Isaakites,  were  thus  a 
phenomenon,  not  unique,  but  remarkable  and  tran- 
scendent in  the  midst  of  the  Hebraic  family;  just  as 
Borne  stands  out  among  all  the  Latin  and  Italiot  popu- 
lations, as  an  almost  miraculous  case.  Borne  was  in 
Latium  a sort  of  asylum  of  selection.  The  tribe  of  the 
Beni-Israel  appears  to  have  been  something  of  the 
same  kind  among  the  Hebraic  tribes.  We  may  fancy 
Israel  as  being  a sort  of  Geneva  in  the  midst  of  the 
varied  populations,  a rendezvous  of  the  pure,  a sect — 
or  an  order  if  that  expression  be  preferred — analogous 
to  the  Kliouan  Mussulmans,  much  more  than  as  a dis- 
tinct ethnos.  The  Edomites  and  Moabites,  in  fact,  weie 
already  permanently  settled  in  the  east  and  west  of 
the  Head  Sea,  when  the  Beni-Israel  found  their  way 
as  vagrant  pastors  to  the  same  region.  It  is  possible 
that  these  latter  may  have  remained  systematically 
and  from  religious  motives  attached  to  the  nomad  life, 
which  tended  more  than  any  other  to  preserve  the 
antique  habits.  The  Beni-Bekab  were  still  more 
tenacious,  inasmuch  as  they  continued  up  to  at  least 
the  sixth  century  b.c.  to  live  under  the  tent,  and  to 


THE  BENI-JACOB,  OR  BENI-ISRAEL. 


93 


lead  their  ancient  mode  of  life.  We  shall  find,  more- 
over, this  lofty  ideal  of  the  nomad  life  remaining  a 
sort  of  magnetic  pole,  towards  which  Israel  wTill 
constantly  gravitate  * In  a very  real  sense  the  fixed 
settlement  in  the  land  of  Canaan  was  a degradation 
and  a religions  decadence  for  Israel,  and  subsequently 
progress  was  embodied  in  a return  by  reflection  to  the 
ideas  and  sentiments  of  the  antique  genius  of  the 
Hebrews,  so  true  is  it  that  the  first  glimmering  per- 
ceptions of  races  are  those  which  control  their  whole 
history  and  contain  the  secret  of  their  destinies  ! 

This  difference  between  the  nomad  and  fixed  popu- 
lations, which  is  so  capital  a one  nowaday,  had  not, 
however,  in  those  distant  ages,  the  importance  which 
we  attribute  to  it.  Edom,  Moab,  Israel,  and  Amalek 
were  brothers.  Edom  and  Moab  do  not  reveal  them- 
selves to  us  in  the  nomad  state  at  any  stage  of  their 
existence.  Israel  led  in  succession  both  modes  of 
life.  Amalek,  a member  of  the  Edomite  family,  f 
and  Midian,  connected  with  Abraham  through 
Cethura,  never  settled  down  in  one  place.  The  Ama- 
lekites  continued  to  roam  over  all  the  peninsula  of 
Sinai  and  to  the  east  of  Palestine  when  the  rest  of 
Edom  had  for  centuries  settled  down  in  one  place. 
They  then  lived  mingled  with  the  other  populations  of 
Palestine  until  they  were  absorbed  by  the  Israelites. 
It  may  be  said  that  these  peoples  went  through  three 
successive  stages  of  existence:  first  the  pure  nomad 

* See  above,  pp.  51 — 53. 

t Genesis,  ch.  xxxvi.,  v.  12,  16. 

I 2 


94 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


stage,  like  that  of  the  Hebrew  patriarchs  ; then  the 
stage  of  mixture  with  sedentary  populations,  analo- 
gous to  the  life  now  led  by  the  metualis  of  Syria — 
this  being  the  condition  of  Israel  from  its  entry  into 
Canaan  up  to  the  time  of  David,  and  of  Amalek 
among  the  Israelites  until  its  absorption ; and  lastly, 
the  stage  of  small  nationalities  more  or  less  compact, 
with  a national  god,  this  being  the  state  in  which  we 
always  find  Edom  and  Moab,  and  in  which  Israel  is 
found  from  the  date  of  its  being  formed  into  a nation 
about  the  time  of  David. 

The  Hebraic  tribe  soon  came  to  be  broken  up  into 
sub-tribes,  under  the  influence  of  polygamy,  which 
created  great  rivalry  between  the  half-brothers.  The 
Jakobelites  became  divided  from  a very  early  period 
into  ten  families:  Keuben,  Judah,  Simeon,  Dan,  Issa- 
char,  Naphtali,  Asher,  Zebulun,  and  Gad.  It  is 
impossible  to  say  in  what  chronological  order  these 
various  families  appeared  in  Israel.  Eeuben  is  always 
represented  as  the  oldest  and  Benjamin  as  the  youngest 
of  the  house. 

Side  by  side  with  Jacob,  and  upon  the  closest  inti- 
macy with  him,  we  find  mentioned  at  a very  early 
epoch,  the  clan  of  Joseph  or  Josefel,*  which  seems  to 
designate  an  addition  or  adjunction  of  congeners,'!* 

* Grof,  Revue  egypt.,  iv.,  pp.  95  and  following;  Stade,  Zeit- 
schrift,  1886,  pp.  1 and  following,  16. 

t Comp.  iTSDY*.  Esdras,  ch.  viii.,v.  10.  As  an  individual 
name  Joseph  means  the  child  which  is  born  some  time  after  the 
others,  when  no  more  are  expected.  Genesis,  ch.  xxx.,  v.  24,  and 
ch.  xlviii.,  v.  1 and  following. 


THE  BEN  I- JACOB,  OR  BENI-ISRA  EL . 


95 


who  became  afterwards  annexed  to  Israel.  These  late 

1 

comers,  these  grandsons  of  Father  Jacob,  became 
divided  into  two  families,  Ephraim  and  Manasseh. 
"We  shall  see  later  that  a very  reasonable  hypothesis 
suggests  itself  with  regard  to  this  annexation.  After 
the  settlement  of  Israel  in  Canaan,  we  shall  be  struck 
by  the  superiority  of  the  Josephites  over  the  rest  of 
Beni-Israel,  and  we  shall  even  see  that  Joseph  will 
often  be  spoken  of  to  designate  the  whole  of  the  family, 
and  will  become  synonymous  with  Jacob.*  If,  as  I 
believe,  the  Israelites  really  came  from  Padan-Aram, 
it  must  be  confessed  that  nothing  is  known  of  their  long 
journey  from  Harran  to  Shechem.  Shechem  appears 
to  have  been  one  of  the  points  to  which  they  returned 
the  oftenest,  and  up  to  the  period  within  the  limits  of 
history  a number  of  holy  places  were  pointed  out  as 
being  connected  with  their  sojourn  there.  The 
Canaanite  Hivvites,  who  inhabited  Samaria,  appear  to 
have  lived  on  good  terms  with  them,  though  the 
memory  of  a bloody  episode  which  occurred  between  a 
fraction  of  the  Beni- Jacob  and  the  people  of  Shechem 
had  not  died  out.j* 

* Jacob  and  Joseph  are  constantly  spoken  of  in  parallel  terms 
in  the  Psalms.  See  Psalms  lxxx.,  v.  2,  and  Ixxxi.,  v.  6;  Amos, 
ch.  v.,  v.  15;  ch.  vi.,  v.  6.  These  instances  of  polynomia  are  of 
frequent  occurrence  among  ancient  peoples.  Thus  the  Greeks  are 
named  IleAacryoi,  Graii,  ’A^atot,  Mvpp^oyeg,  &c.,  the  Trojans, 
Tpms,  AapSavot;  their  town  called  TAtov,  Tlipya/xov,  &c. 

t Genesis,  ch.xxxiv. ; Genesis,  ch.  xlix.,  v.  5 — 7,  a poetical  frag- 
ment, which  may  be  regarded  as  the  origin  of  the  prose  narrative. 
In  this  narrative  we  may  detect  the  desire  to  extenuate  the  mis 
conduct  of  the  Beni-Jacob.  The  passage  in  verse,  upon  the  con 


96  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


Hebron  was  a not  less  important  centre  of  initiation 
for  the  wandering  Israelites.*  They  lived  with  the 
Hittites  or  Klietas  upon  the  most  friendly  footing.*]* 
The  important  well  of  Beer-Sheba,  where  they  halted 
like  so  many  generations  of  pastors,  left  profound  recol- 
lections upon  them,:]:  Gerar§and  Ivades-Barne  were 
their  last  halting-places  before  entering  Egypt.  A 
terrible  desert  lay  before  them,  and  beyond  this  desert 
of  fifty  miles  they  sniffed  the  land  of  the  Kile,  with 
its  abundance,  its  wealth,  and  its  delights.  A sort  of 
powerful  attraction  thereupon  took  possession  of 
these  poverty-stricken  beings,  who  were  reduced  to 
struggling  with  the  other  Bedouins  for  a few  drops  of 
water,  and  whom  anything  like  famine  brought  to  a 
terrible  plight. 

The  numerous  episodes  of  the  charming  pastoral 
epopcea  which  was  afterwards  built  upon  this  golden 
age  had  little  that  was  historical  about  it ; and  the 
artificial  method  attending  the  composition  of  each 
episode  is  easy  to  gather,  but  the  colour  of  the  narra- 
tives is  truth  itself.  It  is  analogous  with  the  Kitab- 
el-Aghani  of  the  Arabs,  which  is  an  incomparable 
picture  of  ancient  life,  though  a picture  containing 

trary,  suggests  the  commission  of  a frightful  crime,  which  for  a long 
time  rendered  Israel  odious  to  its  neighbours. 

* Genesis,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  18. 

t Note  particularly  Genesis,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  13  (an  almost  pre-historic 
passage),  and  ch.  xxiii. 

X Genesis,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  28  and  following. 

§ Genesis,  ch.  xx.,  v.  2;  ch.  xxvi.  v.  1,  taking  into  account 
the  anachronism.  The  Philistines  were  not  yet  established  in 
Palestine  at  the  patriarchal  epoch. 


THE  BENI- JACOB,  OR  BENI-ISRAEL.  97 

few  elements  worthy  of  credit.  There  is  only  one 
fragment  in  these  legends  which  has  the  appearance 
of  being  taken  from  authentic  ancient  books,  and  this 
is  the  passage  relating  to  the  war  of  the  four  Chaldoean 
kings,  which  one  of  the  narrators  has  adapted  more 
or  less  skilfully  into  his  story.*  According  to  this 
fragment,  11  Abraham  the  Hebrew,  who  dwelt  in  the 
plain  of  Harare  the  Amorite,”  took  part  in  the  inva- 
sion of  the  countries  of  the  Dead  Sea,  of  Kudur- 
Lagamar,  King  of  Elami,  and  his  allies.  In  order  to 
deliver  Lot,  his  nephew,  whom  the  invaders  had 
carried  off,  Abraham  the  Hebrew  is  said  to  have 
formed  a small  army  consisting  of  318  of  his  servants, 
and  had  rescued  his  nephew  from  the  hands  of  the 
four  kings.  This  is  not  to  be  taken  literally  ; Lot  and 
Abraham  doubtless  had  an  ethnographical  meaning, 
and  were  intended  to  designate,  upon  one  hand,  the 
general  body  of  the  Hebrew  tribes,  and,  upon  the 
other  hand,  the  populations  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  whom  the  Egyptians  called  Eotenu,f 
and  who,  according  to  the  Israelite  ethnographers, 
were  the  near  relatives  of  Abraham. 

The  Beni-Israel  thought  too  that  they  could  remem- 
ber a time  when  the  southern  part  of  the  Dead  Sea 
was  a valley,  in  which  were  situated  towns  the  history 
of  which  was  connected  with  the  campaign  of  the 
Chaldaean  kings,  and  which  were  destroyed  by  a con- 
flagration of  bitumen.^  The  geographical  theory  upon 

* Genesis,  ch.  xiv.  t See  above,  p.  10. 

J Genesis,  ch.  xiv. 


g8  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


which  these  stories  are  based  is  one  that  cannot  be 
admitted,  inasmuch  as  it  is  proved  that  the  waters  of 
the  Lake  Asphaltites  have  been  constantly  falling,  and 
that  the  lake  has,  in  consequence,  been  gradually 
getting  smaller.*  The  strange  aspect  of  the  valley, 
with  its  pillars  of  salt,  resembling  veiled  statues,  j*  the 
peculiar  properties  of  the  waters  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
suffice  to  explain  the  birth  of  these  legends.^  It  is 
dangerous  to  look  too  closely  after  history  in  ancient 
dreams,  where  spectres  are  indistinguishable  from 
men.  Dut  the  Israelitish  imagination  retained  a strong 
impression  of  these  narratives,  and  they  believed  that 
the  Ref  dim ,§  phantoms  of  vanished  races,  and  the 
Enakim  giants  peopled  this  u valley  of  the  dead,” 
where  they  still  thought  they  could  discern  the  living 
traces  of  the  terrible  vengeance  of  the  just  elohim. 

* Lartet’s  Ex  pi.  geol.  de  la  mer  Morte,  pp.  174  and  following, 
2G6  and  following, 

t Robinson,  Pal.,  ii. , 435  ; iii.,  22  and  following;  Seetzen,  i., 
428;  ii.,  227,  240;  Lynch,  Narrative,  ch.  xiv. 

J Genesis,  ch.  xiv.,  xviii.,  xix. 

§ Job,  cb.  xxvi.,  v.  5.  The  name  Siddim,  said  to  have  been  given 
to  the  ancient  valley,  is  perhaps  a mispronunciation  for  Sedim. 
“ the  Valley  of  Demons.” 


CHAPTEK  IX. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  BENI-ISRAEL. 

A religion  without  a dogma,  without  a hook,  and 
without  a priest  is  of  necessity  very  open  to  external 
influences.  Thus  the  ancient  Hebrews  were  inclined 
to  accept,  with  a facility  which  the  grayer  among  them 
severely  blamed,  the  rites  of  neighbouring  peoples. 
The  habit  of  throwing  kisses  of  adoration  to  the  sun 
and  moon  struck  them  with  astonishment,  and  they 
were  inclined  to  imitate  it.*  The  holy  places  of  the 
Canaanites  more  especially  inspired  them  with  a 
mingled  feeling  of  respect  and  dread.  The  Canaanite 
town  of  Luz  contained  a spot  which  popular  belief 
associated  with  terrors  and  visions.  It  was  regarded 
as  the  gate  of  heaven,  as  the  foot  of  a vast  staircase  or 
pyramid,  with  steps  ( sullam ) which  ascended  from  earth 
to  heaven,  f The  elohim  occupied  the  summit,  and 
their  messengers  were  continually  descending  and  as- 
cending it,  bringing  the  earth  into  communication 
with  the  world  above.  The  ancient  Hebrew  patriarchs 
held  this  place  in  great  veneration ; they  called  it,  as 
everyone  else  did,  Bethel ; that  is  to  say,  the  house  or 

* Job,  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  26  and  following. 

+ Genesis,  cb.  xxviii.,  v.  12,  13.  For  the  meaning  of 
compare  the  Palmyra  Inscription,  No.  11.  (Yogue). 


100  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


temple  of  God.*  Luz,  in  addition  to  its  sullam , pos- 
sessed one  of  tlie  pillars,  or  ansab , anointed  with  oil, 
erected  by  unknown  adorers,  but  which  the  new- 
comers regarded  as  being  quite  as  sacred  as  if  they 
had  raised  them  themselves.  The  Israelites  adopted 
the  pillar  of  Bethel,  as  Mahomet  was  in  after  days 
obliged  to  adopt  the  Caaba.  It  was  asserted  that  the 
stela  in  question  had  been  raised  by  the  patriarch 
Jacob, f the  consequence  being  that  this  spot  became 
the  chief  sanctuary  in  Palestine.  The  God  of  Bethel, 
in  particular,  was  looked  upon  as  the  supreme  master 
of  the  country,  with  power  to  dispose  of  it  as  his  own 
property.  Subsequently  he  was  identified  with  Iahveh, 
and  it  was  supposed  that  the  Israelites  had  received 
from  this  powerful  local  god  a formal  donation,  which 
constituted  their  title  to  the  possession  of  Palestine.  J 
It  was  admitted  that  each  people  held  the  land  of 
which  it  was  owner  from  its  own  god,  though  it  should 
be  added  that  this  same  god  often  took  the  land  from 
others  to  give  it  to  his  chosen  people.  § 

The  masses  are  always  idolatrous,  and  the  puritans 

* Genesis,  ck.  xii. , v.  8;  ck.  xiii.,  v.  3,  4;  ck.  xxviii.,  v. 
10 — 22;  ck.  xxxi.,  v.  9 — 15;  ck.  xxxv.,  v.  1 and  following.  All 
tkese  passages  in  tke  kistory  of  Jacok  are  strongly  polytkeistic. 

t Genesis,  ck.  xxviii.,  v.  19.  It  is  not  tke  stone  kut  tke  place 
wkick  Jacok  calls  Betkel.  Tke  connection  witk  betyle  (Sanckonia- 
tkon)  remains  doubtful. 

+ Genesis,  ck.  xiii.,  v.  3 — 4 ; ck.  xxviii.,  v.  13 — 16  ; 20 — 21.  See 
above,  p.  30. 

§ Judges,  ck.  xi.,  v.  24,  and  tke  whole  of  tke.  supposed  message 
of  Jepktkak. 


IOI 


RELIGION  OF  THE  B EAT- ISRAEL . 

of  the  Israelitish  clan  had  great  difficulty  in  preventing 
the  unenlightened,  women  more  especially,  from  prac- 
tising the  Aramaic  and  Canaanite  superstitions.  The 
chief  abuse  was  with  the  teraphim , a kind  of  idol,  pro- 
bably made  of  carved  wood,  which  were  carried  on  the 
person,  and  were  regarded  as  a sort  of  household  gods 
and  domestic  oracles.  * The  wise  men  protested  against 
these  follies.  The  name  of  laliou , or  Iahveh,  the  equi- 
valent of  El,  was  no  doubt  much  respected,  but  the 
sages  of  these  very  ancient  times  seemed  to  descry  a 
danger  in  this  proper  name,  and  preferred  the  names 
of  El,  Elion , Sad dai,  and  Elohim.  The  name  of  A hr 
Ialcob , “the  Fort  of  Iakob,”-j*  was  for  a long  time 
preferred,  and  was  in  common  use  some  time  before 
that  of  Iahveh.  The  offering  of  the  first-fruits,  and 
therefore  of  the  first-born,  to  the  Divinity  was  one 
of  the  oldest  ideas  of  the  so-called  Semitic  peoples. 
Moloch  and  Iahveh,  more  especially,  were  conceived  as 
being  the  fire  which  devours  that  which  is  offered  to 
it,  so  that  to  give  to  God  was  to  give  food  to  the  fire. 
What  was  consumed  by  the  fire  was  consumed  by  God. 
In  this  way  the  most  revolting  misapprehensions  took 
root.  Moloch  was  a terrible  bull  of  fire,  $ and  to  offer 
the  first-born  to  Moloch  was  to  offer  them  to  the  fire, 

* Genesis,  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  19,  30,  34  (compare  Genesis,  ch.  xxxv., 
v.  2,  4) ; Judges,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  14  and  following  (compare  ch.  xvii., 
v.  5) ; First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xix.,  v.  13,  16. 

f The  Blessing  of  Jacob,  a very  ancient  fragment,  Genesis,  ch. 
xlix.,  v.  24. 

| Diodorus  Siculus,  XX.,  xiv.,  6. 


*102  ' * * * § HIS'TQRY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

either’  by  allowing  them  to  be  burnt  outright  or  to  be 
passed  through  the  flames. 

The  consequence  of  these  hideous  chimeras  was 
human  sacrifice  upon  so  appalling  a scale  that  the  idea 
of  looking  for  some  substitute  soon  suggested  itself. 
The  first-born  was  replaced  by  an  animal  or  a sum  of 
money.*  This  was  called  “the  money  of  the  lives.”  f 
The  wise  King  of  Ur-Casdim  seems  to  have  owed 
some  of  the  respect  with  which  he  was  treated  to  the 
fact  of  his  having  immolated  a ram  in  the  stead  of  his 
son,  when  circumstances  called  for  the  sacrifice  of  the 
latter.  J Real  immolations  were  not  rare  with  the 
Phoenicians,  § especially  among  the  Carthaginians.  ||  The 
Hebrews  or  Terachites  also  sullied  themselves  some- 
times with  these  abominations.^  In  the  event  of 
pressing  danger  in  Phoenicia,  Carthage,  and  the  land 
of  Moab,  the  sovereigns  and  the  great  made,  in  com- 
pliance with  the  cruel  popular  prejudice,  the  sacrifice 
of  some  one  dear  to  them  or  of  their  eldest  son.  We 
have  a striking  example  of  this  among  the  Moabites  at 
the  time  of  Elijah  and  Elisha.  The  example  of  Jephthah 
and  the  legend  of  Abraham’s  sacrifice  show  that  the 
Beni-Israel  were  no  more  exempt  than  their  congeners 
from  this  odious  rite. 

* Numbers,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  15  and  following. 

t mttfSa  PpD.  Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xii.,  v.  4. 

J See  above,  pp.  63,  64. 

§ Sanchoniathon,  p.  36  (Orelli). 

||  Corpus  inscr.  semit.,  Nos.  171,  194. 

H Mesa,  Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  iii.,  v.  27;  Comp.  Diodorus 
Siculus,  XX.,  xiv. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  BENI  ISRAEL. 


103 


I believe  that  the  perilous  idea  of  the  offering  of  the 
first-born  did  not  bear  fruit  previous  to  the  national 
epoch,  when  the  people  were  established  in  Canaan, 
and  when  Iahveh  had  become  their  local  god,  as  Camos 
was  the  local  god  of  Moab.  The  national  religion  is 
always  the  bloodiest  one.  In  the  primitive  elohism, 
monstrosities  of  this  kind  were  condemned,  and  they 
must  have  been  extremely  rare  among  the  nomads. 
Among  the  pagan  practices  reproved  by  Job,  human 
sacrifices  are  not  mentioned,  doubtless  because  that 
horror  hardly  ever  occurred.  In  any  event,  the  civ- 
ilising attempt  of  the  Israelite  prophets  succeeded, 
at  a very  early  period,  in  substituting  for  this  blood- 
stained rite  the  inoffensive  offering  up  of  the  first- 
born of  the  flock.  A ransom,  not  clearly  explained, 
represented  the  primitive  immolation  of  “ that  which 
opens  the  womb.”*  The  God  of  Abraham  was  always 
credited  with  having  a strong  aversion  from  human 
sacrifices.  The  horrible  sacrifices  of  children,  which 
were  the  disgrace  of  the  seventh  century  b.c.,  re- 
mained unknown,  it  would  appear,  to  the  patriarchal 
tent. 

The  agents  of  civilisation  were,  even  thus  early, 
endeavouring  by  well-considered  practices  to  extend 
culture  and  restrain  barbarism.  Their  purpose  was 

• Book  of  the  alliance,  Exodus,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  28.  Compare  the 
Elohist  passage,  Exodus,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  1 — 2,  10  and  following.  The 
expression  rTQ2?n  (v.  12)  is  the  expression  employed  everywhere 
else  to  express  the  act  of  passing  children  through  the  fire  in 
honour  of  Moloch.  See  Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xii.,  v.  3 ; 
Gesenius,  Thes.,  p.  985. 


io4 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


to  effect  the  education  of  the  body  as  well  as  that  of 
the  mind.  One  of  the  causes  of  physical  and  moral 
filth  was  the  habit  of  eating  carrion  and  diseased 
animals.  The  distinction  between  clean  and  unclean 
animals  is  a very  old  one,  although  the  list  of  those 
which  were  prohibited  was  only  drawn  up  later 
and  has  varied  considerably. * Swine,  which  in  the 
East  are  very  subject  to  trichinosis,  were  among 
the  very  earliest  meats  to  be  avoided.  A direction 
followed  by  all  those  who  were  afraid  of  doing  wrong 
was  not  to  drink  blood,  and  to  avoid  eating  animals 
which  had  not  been  bled.f  The  blood  was  regarded 
as  the  constitutive  element  of  the  person.  It  was  a 
maxim  that  “the  soul  is  in  the  blood;”  so  that  to 
assimilate  a man’s  blood  was  to  absorb  him  and  to 
devour  his  very  self. 

Among  the  observances  which,  under  the  cover  of 
the  Semitic  religions,  have  made  the  round  of  the 
world,  and  which  seem  to  go  back  to  the  Terachite 
period,  must  be  included,  as  it  would  seem,  that  of 
circumcision.  The  unvarying  custom  of  the  Elohist 
narrator  is  to  ascribe  the  origin  of  circumcision  to 
ante-Mosaic  times  and  his  reason  for  doing  so  was 
probably  based  upon  the  observation  that  most  of  the 
Terachite  peoples  practised  circumcision,  though  not 

* See  lists  in  Leviticus  and  Deuteronomy. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  xiv.,  v.  31  and  following,  ancient 
text,  forming  part  of  a whole  in  which  the  instructions  of  the 
Thora  properly  so  called  are  ignored. 

J Genesis,  ch.  xvii.  ; xxi.,  v.  4;  xxxiv.,  v.  15  and  following. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  BENI-ISRA EL.  105 

nearly  so  regularly  as  the  Beni-Israel.*  The  popula- 
tions of  Syria  and  Arabia,  in  particular,  practised  the 
operation  long  before  Islam.  The  ancient  Greeks 
remarked  this;  only  they  were  wrong  in  believing 
that  Egypt  was  the  sole  origin  of  this  custom. -j*  As 
to  the  Israelites,  they  never  classed  the  Moabites 
and  Edomites  as  garelim , or  uncircumcised. J This 
qualification  was  originally  applied  by  them  only  to 
the  Philistines,  § who  were  undoubtedly  Cretans  or 
Carians. 

At  first  this  custom  was  not  so  general  and  had  not 
the  religious  signification  which  was  given  to  it  after- 
wards. It  was  an  operation  resorted  to  by  many  tribes, 
and  it  was  one  which  had  its  physiological  reasons. || 

* Circumcision  of  Ishmael,  Genesis,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  23,  25  and 
following.  Jos.,  Ant.,  I.,  xii.,  2. 

t Herodotus,  ii. , 30,  36,  37,  104;  Diodorus  Siculus,  I.,xxyiii., 
3;  III.,  xxxii.,  5;  Agatharchidas,  De  mari  Erythr.,  61;  Strabo, 
XVI.,  iv.,  17  ; XVII.,  iii. , 5.  Comp.  Jos.,  Ant.,  VIII.,  x.,  3 ; Contre 
Apion,  I.,  22;  Epiph.,  Haer.  i.,  33;  ix.,  30;  Origen,  Comment,  in 
Gen.,  10;  Eusebius,  Creep,  evang.,  vi.,  11;  Pbilostratus , H.  E., 
iii.,  4 ; Schahristani,  trans.  Haarbriieker,  ii.,  354. — Upon  tbe 
other  hand,  see  Jos.,  Ant.,  XIII.,  ix.,  1 ; xi.,  3 ; Vita,  23.  “ Circum- 
cision was  practised,  but  was  not  compulsory,  in  Egypt.  The 
royal  mummies  whose  generative  parts  have  not  been  removed  are 
many  of  them  uncircumcised.  A statue  at  Boulaq,  appertaining 
to  the  first  dynasty,  is  circumcised.”  (Remark  of  M.  Maspero.) 

X Jeremiah,  ix.  26  does  not  prove  anything  on  this  head. 

§ Iashar,  in  2nd  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  i.,  v.  20;  Judges,  ch. 
xiv.,  v.  3,  and  in  general  throughout  the  Books  of  Judges  and  of 
Samuel.  The  Canaanites  were  for  the  most  part  uncircumcised. 
Genesis,  xxxiv.  Sanchoniathon  (Orelli),  p.  36,  is  scarcely  worth 
attention.  The  idea  of  a connection  between  the  sacrifice  of  the 
first-born  and  circumcision  is  quite  superficial. 

||  Philo,  De  circumcisione,  Opp.,  ii.,  210  and  following. 


ro6  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


Without  it,  certain  races  of  the  East  would  have  been 
to  a certain  extent  impotent,  and  would  have  been 
doomed  to  acts  of  lamentable  impurity.*  The  opera- 
tion was  often  performed  just  before  marriage.t  The 
young  man  was  then  called  hatan  damim , u the  bleed- 
ing betrothed.”^  The  same  custom  still  exists  among 
some  Arab  tribes. § With  other  tribes  the  circum- 
cision was  an  annual  festival,  and  all  the  adults  born 
in  the  same  year  were  circumcised  upon  the  same  day. 
This  was  their  introduction  to  sexual  connection, 
which  had  hitherto  been  debarred  them,  and  from  this 
date  they  were  at  liberty  to  marry. ||  But  this  mode 
of  proceeding  had  great  drawbacks.  As  the  operation 
is  a much  more  serious  one  for  adults  than  for 
children^]  the  circumcision  of  children  became  the 
rule.  The  reasoning  which  led  to  this  was  analogous 
to  that  which  has  in  our  day  led  to  compulsory 
education.  It  was  not  unreasonably  regarded  as  a fault 
for  parents  to  omit  doing  what  would  prevent  their 

* Quia  pueris  prseputium  apud  eos  multo  longius  est  quam  apud 
nos,  quod  in  re  venerea  multum  nocet.  J.  de  Tkevenot,  Voyages  I., 
ck.  xxxii. ; Niekukr,  Descr.  de  V Arabie,  p.  69  ; Winer,  Bibl.  Realw., 
i.,  p.  159.  Tke  root  Jyi  signifies  “to  ke  too  long,”  and  kas  no 
meaning,  eitker  religious  or  irreligious. 

f Genesis,  ck.  xxxiv.,  Elokist  part. 

J Exodus,  ck.  iv.,  v.  25  and  following.  Witk  regard  to  tke 
varied  meaning  of  signifying  at  once  “ to  circumcise,  son-in- 
law,  fatker-in-law,”  see  Stade  and  Wellkausen  quoted  below ; 
Gesenius,  Thes.,  p.  539. 

§ Wellkausen,  Prol.,  p.  360. 

||  Stade,  Zeitschrift  fiir  die  alttest.  Wiss.,  1885,  p.  135  and 
following  (after  Ploss). 

Genesis,  ck.  xxxiv.,  v.  24  and  following. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  BENI-ISRA EL. 


107 

children  from  suffering  from  a far  more  painful  opera- 
tion in  after  life. 

The  word  garel , indicating  the  natural  state  of  the 
organs, * in  time  became  synonymous  with  sullied;  and 
this  was  a gross  insult,  especially  when  addressed  to 
the  Philistines,  j"  The  operation  of  removing  the  gorla 
assumed  a ritual  meaning,  and,  as  generally  happens 
in  ’a  case  of  this  kind,  the  distinction  between  the 
sacramental  accessory  and  the  principal  was  lost  sight 
of.  In  very  ancient  times  the  operation  was  performed 
with  flint  knives,  because  there  was  no  such  a thing; 
as  a metal  blade.!  It  was  for  a long  time  believed 
that  the  use  of  the  flint  knife  was  essential,  and  it 
was  still  employed  even  after  the  free  use  of  metals. 
Moreover,  the  original  reason  for  the  operation  was 
lost  sight  of,  and  races  which  from  a physiological 
point  of  view  had  no  need  of  it  adopted  it,  regarding 
it  as  a religious  initiation  and  a purification.  Circum- 
cision, in  a word,  after  being  a useful  precaution  in 
certain  cases,  became  a practice  deemed  good  for  all 
men,  and  eventually  compulsory  upon  all.  This  is  what 
one  so  often  finds  in  the  history  of  religions.  A precept 

* It  is  curious  that  the  uncircumcised  should  never  be  desig- 
nated in  Hebrew  by  the  negation  of  circumcision,  bUM'fcO,  for 
instance. 

+ D'VlE  is  already  found  in  use  as  a word  of  insult  to  the 
Philistines,  in  an  authentic  chant  of  the  time  of  David  (Second 
Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  i.,  v.  20.) 

| Exodus,  ch.  iv.,  v.  25;  Joshua,  ch.  v.,  v.  2 and  following  ; Hero- 
dotus, ii.,  86.  This  usage  is  still  prevalent  in  Abyssinia.  Ludolf, 
Hist,  ceth.,  i.,  21. 

K 


io8  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


which  has  its  local  and  individual  use  becomes,  once 
that  it  has  been  treated  as  sacred,  a universal  precept, 
which  is  adhered  to  in  climates  and  by  peoples  which 
have  no  need  for  it. 

Islamism  intensified  the  error  of  Judaism.  A custom 
which  had  its  use  for  certain  Eastern  races  made  differ- 
ently from  what  we  are,  spread  among  races  to  whom 
it  brought  more  drawbacks  than  advantages.  The  idea 
that  the  peoples  who  had  not  undergone  this  operation 
were  in  some  measure  impure,  and  that  all  contact  with 
them  should  be  avoided,  was  a particularly  unfortunate 
one,  for  it  led  the  Israelites  to  commit  the  most  revolt- 
ing acts  of  intolerance,*  for  which  those  whom  they 
maltreated  avenged  themselves  by  jests,  and  for  their 
taunt  of  longiis  j*  was  thrown  back  the  epithet  curtus. 

The  adoption  of  this  usage  by  the  Israelites  may  be 
regarded,  then,  as  a great  historical  blunder.  Circum- 
cision was  in  the  religious  life  of  Israel  an  act  in 
contradiction  with  its  true  vocation,  and  was  very 
nearly  causing  it  to  miss  its  providential  function. 
The  rigorists  took  advantage  of  this  practice  to  preach 
total  sequestration.  When  the  genius  of  propaganda 
and  the  dream  of  a universal  religion  for  the  human 
race  became  the  dominant  idea  of  Israel,  circumcision 
stood  in  the  way  as  the  great  obstacle.  It  was  very 
nearly  causing  the  whole  scheme  to  fail.  If  St.  Paul 

* The  compulsory  circumcisions  in  the  time  of  the  Asmoneans ; 
idea  that  the  allies  of  Israel  ought  to  be  circumcised.  Sanckonia- 
tkon  (Orelli),  p.  36. 

f This  is  the  meaning  of  the  words  Vi 37  = 


RELIGION  OF  THE  BENI-ISRA EL. 


109 

had  not  got  the  better  in  his  struggle  with  James, 
Christianity  (that  is  to  say,  universal  Judaism)  would 
have  had  no  future  before  it. 

Like  nearly  all  the  primitive  peoples,*  the  Hebrews 
believed  in  a sort  of  doubling  of  the  person,  — a 
shadow,  a pale  and  vacuous  figure,  which,  after  death, 
went  beneath  the  earth,  and  there  led  a sad  and 
gloomy  existence  in  dark  and  sombre  chambers. f 
These  were  the  Manes  of  the  Latins,  the  veKves  of  the 
Greeks.  The  Hebrews  called  them  Refa'im , a word 
which  seems  to  have  meant  phantoms,  and  to  have 
been  employed  much  in  the  same  way  as  heroes. % 
signifying  at  once  heroes  and  the  dead.  The  abode  of 
these  poor  exhausted  beings  was  called  scheol.  It  was 
conceived  upon  the  analogy  of  the  family  tombs,  where 
the  dead  rested  side  by  side,  so  much  so  that  to  descend 
into  sclieol  was  synonymous  with  being  gathered  to 
one’s  fathers.  § The  dead  existed  there  unconscious, 
without  knowledge,  without  memory,  in  a world  without 
light,  abandoned  of  God.||  There  was  no  recompense, 
no  punishment.  “ God  doth  not  heed  them.”  Those 

* See  above,  pp.  24,  34  and  following;  Eeville,  Relip.  des 
peuples  non- civilises,  vol.  i.,  pp.  67  and  following;  vol.  ii.,  pp.  89 
and  following,  203  and  following. 

t Inscription  of  Esmunazar,  Corpus  insc.  semit.,  part  i.,  No.  3; 
inscr.  of  Tabnith,  Acad,  des  laser,  et  Belles-Lettres,  June  24,  1887. 

+ Heroopolis  = Typkonian  fables;  Valley  of  the 

Refa'im  or  Heroes  = Fables  of  tbe  Dead  Sea. 

§ Genesis,  ch.  xv.,  v.  15 ; ck.  xxxv.,  v.  29. 

||  Psalm  vi.,  v.  6;  lxxxviii.,  v.  6 and  following;  cxv.,  v.  17 
and  18  ; Isaiak,  ck.  xxxviii.,  v.  18  and  following;  Job, ck.  xiv.,  v, 
21,  22. 


no  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


persons  who  had  any  sort  of  enlightenment  saw  very 
clearly  that  an  existence  of  this  kind  was  very  much 
like  annihilation ; but  most  people,  nevertheless,  be- 
thought themselves  of  seeming  a good  place,  a com- 
fortable bed,  against  the  day  that  they  should  join  the 
Eefaim.  What  gave  the  greatest  comfort  was  to  think 
that  one  would  be  among  one’s  ancestors  and  resting 
with  them.*  Ideas  of  this  kind  seem  to  have  had  a 
stronger  hold  upon  the  imagination  of  the  Canaan ites 
than  of  the  Hebrews. j*  It  would  appear  as  if  the  wiser 
of  the  Hebrews  took  precautions  to  prevent  the  masses 
from  being  engrossed  by  these  ideas,  which  as  a rule 
have  such  a fascination  for  the  people.  The  descent 
into  hell  and  the  peregrinations  athwart  the  circles 
of  the  other  world,  such  as  absorbed  the  thoughts  of 
the  Assyrians  and  Egyptians,  savoured  to  them  of 
impiety.  £ 

All  this  was  due  to  the  profound  separation  which 
the  Hebraic  conscience  from  the  first  laid  down  be- 
tween man  and  God.  With  the  Aryan  the  Pitris , or 

* Genesis,  ch.  xxv.,  v.  8;  xxxv.,  v.  29  ; ch.  xlix.,  v.  29  ; Num- 
bers, ch.  xx.,  v.  26;  Judges,  cb.  ii.,  v.  10;  First  Book  of  Kings, 
cb.  xiii.,  v.  23  ; Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  20;  Ezekiel, 
cb.  xxxii.,  v.  18  and  following. 

1 Esmunazar  and  Tabnith  inscriptions,  texts  of  priceless  value, 
because  they  give  us  a fair  idea  of  what  a rqfas  reasoning  was 
like. 

t It  may  be  added  that  the  Egyptians  and  Assyrians  appear  to 
have  formed,  successively  or  simultaneously,  the  two  conceptions, 
of  a sad  and  gloomy  sclieol,  and  that  of  an  after  life  full  of  rewards 
and  expiations.  Maspero,  in  the  Revue  ile  Vhistoire  des  religions , 
1886,  vol.  xiii.,  pp.  125  and  following;  Etudes  eggptiennes , vol. 
i.,  pp.  185 — 190. 


RELIGION  OF  THE  BENI-ISRAEL. 


1 1 1 


ancestors,  were  gods,  and  consequently  immortal.  In 
Egypt  the  dead  man  becomes  an  Osiris,  a divine  and 
eternal  spirit.  The  Ilebrew  patriarch  regarded  such 
ideas  as  highly  indecorous.  God  alone  is  eternal ; an 
eternal  being  would  be  God.  Man  is  essentially  fleet- 
ing. He  lives  a few  brief  days  and  then  disappears 
for  ever.  There  are,  no  doubt,  some  very  virtuous 
men,  friends  of  God,  whom  God  carries  up  that  they 
may  be  with  him.*  But,  apart  from  these  elect,  it  is 
the  fate  of  man  to  disappear  in  oblivion.  He  has 
no  reason  to  complain  if  he  has  been  accorded  a fair 
length  of  years,  if  he  leaves  children  to  perpetuate  his 
family ; if,  after  his  death,  his  name  is  pronounced 
with  respect  at  the  gate  of  his  place. f In  default  of 
all  that,  an  iad , a pillar  bearing  his  name,  is  some  con- 
solation ; | not  much,  it  is  true,  but  better  than  none 
at  all.  What  else  is  there  for  you  ? 

The  latent  consequences  of  such  a conception  of  life 
were  that  the  justice  of  God  did  not  extend  beyond  this 
lower  world,  a fact  which  must  have  perplexed  the 
simple  patriarch  with  much  astonishment.  The  Book 
of  Job  was  not  written  for  another  thousand  years,  but 
even  at  the  early  age  of  which  I am  speaking  it  must 
have  been  thought.  The  sage  was  perplexed  to  know 
what  to  say  when  he  saw  a wicked  man  prosperous,  a 
just  man  rebuked.  But  the  world  was  still  very 

* Enoch : Genesis,  ch.  v.,  v.  22.  But  this  legend  appears  to  be 
of  Babylonian  origin. 

f Buth,  ch.  iv.,  v.  10,  14. 

J Isaiah,  ch.  lvi.,  v.  5. 


1 1 2 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


simple-minded,  and  the  solutions,  which  were  at  a later 
date  regarded  as  insufficient,  were  accepted  as  giving 
a more  or  less  reasonable  explanation  of  the  providen- 
tial government  of  the  universe. 

The  belief  was  that  evil  produced  evil  of  itself,  and 
perforce  entailed  punishment,  even  when  the  law  was 
transgressed  unwillingly.* * * §  There  was  no  distinction 
between  sin  and  error,  f The  family  was  regarded  as 
a thing  so  sacred  that  a breach  of  the  conjugal  tie, 
even  in  ignorance,  entailed  death  and  the  most  terrible 
chastisements.^  Good,  upon  the  contrary,  was  re- 
compensed by  long  life  and  a numerous  posterity. § 
This  took  place  almost  automatically,  so  to  speak. 
God  slew  the  man  who  did  any  peculiarly  evil  deed.J] 
Life  was  a good  gift,  a favour  of  God.  Long  life  was 
the  reward  of  the  just.  The  man  without  reproach 
might  be  severely  tried,  but  God  would  avenge  him ; 
be  saw  his  children  and  his  children’s  children,  even 
to  the  fourth  generation,  and  he  died  at  the  age  of  six 
score  years,  full  of  days.^| 

* Double  meaning  of  -words  bttr,  Nltt?,  &c.,  signifying  at  the 
same  time  the  evil  and  the  punishment.  Genesis,  cli.  xlii.,  v.  21, 
22,28;  Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  9 and  following; 
Isaiah,  ch.  v.,  v.  18. 

f Note  carefully  the  shades  of  meaning  of  the  verb 

I Genesis,  ch.  xii.,  v.  17 'and  following ; ch.  xviii.,  xix. ; cn. 
xx.,  v.  6 ; ch.  xxvi.,  v.  10. 

§ Exodus,  ch.  i.,  v.  21. 

||  Genesis,  ch.  xxxviii.,  v.  7,  10. 

V Job,  last  verse.  It  was  the  same  with  Tobias  and  Judith. 


CHAPTER  X. 


THE  BENI-ISRAEL  IN  EGYPT. 

The  counter-influence  of  the  arrival  of  the  Semites  in  the 
regions  of  the  Mediterranean  promptly  made  itself  felt 
in  Egypt.  Egyptian  civilisation  was  from  two  to  three 
thousand  years  old  when  this  great  event  in  the  world’s 
history  took  place.  XJp  to  that  time  Egypt  had  been 
familiar,  in  the  Sinaitic  peninsula  and  in  the  regions 
bordering  upon  the  isthmus,  with  bands  of  plunderers 
(sati  or  shasus ),  differing  very  little  in  their  habits 
from  the  low-class  Bedouin,*  but  of  doubtful  race. 
But  there  can  be  no  doubt,  upon  the  contrary,  as  to 
the  Semitic  character  of  these  Hyksos , or  Shepherds,! 
who,  more  than  two  thousand  years  b.c.,  interrupted 
in  a measure  the  current  of  Egyptian  civilisation,  and 

* Maspero,  Hist.  anc.  des  peuples  de  V Orient,  pp.  101  and  fol- 
lowing. (About  2,400  or  2,500  b.c.  at  latest.) 

t The  learned  Jews  of  Alexandria,  having  heard  of  Manethon’s 
History  of  Egypt,  sought  in  it  a connecting  link  of  the  relations  of 
Israel  with  Egypt.  The  comparison  with  the  Hyksos  struck 
them,  and  this  was  the  starting  point  of  interpolations  in  Mane- 
thon’s text,  some  intended  to  favour  the  Jewish  system,  the 
others,  upon  the  contrary,  conceived  in  a spirit  of  depreciation 
towards  Israel.  See  Josephus,  Contre  Apion,  i.,  14,  26 ; Muller, 
Frcigm.  hist,  gr.,  ii.,  pp.  514,  566,  578,  579. 


r 14  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


founded  at  Zoan  (Tunis),*  near  the  Isthmus,  the  centre 
of  a powerful  Semitic  state.  These  Hyksos  were  to  all 
appearances  Canaanites,  near  relations  of  the  Hittites 
of  Hebron.  Hebron  was  in  close  community  with  Zoan, 
and  there  is  a tradition,  probably  based  upon  historical 
data,  that  the  two  cities  were  built  nearly  at  the  same 
time. I As  invariably  happens  when  barbarians  enter 
into  an  ancient  and  powerful  civilisation  the  Hyksos 
soon  became  Egyptian]' sed.  They  raised  Egyptian 
temples  to  the  Semitic  god  Sutekh  (Sydyk),  and 
adapted  Egyptian  hieroglyphics  to  their  requirements. 

It  seems  indeed  that  it  was  in  this  mixed  country  of 
Zoan  that  the  so-called  Phoenician  or  Semitic  writing 
was  invented . J The  necessity  of  transcribing  Semitic 
names  into  Egyptian  led  to  phonetism,  that  is  to  say  to 
a choice  of  hieroglyphic  characters  which  were  stripped 
of  their  meaning,  and  retained  only  their  sounding 
signs. § This  was  exactly  what  the  Chinese  Buddhists 
did  to  render  the  Sanskrit  words, ||  and  especially 

* The  great  retrenched  camp  of  the  Hyksos  Haouarou  (Avaris), 
is  probably  Baal-Saphon  or  Heroopolis. 

t Numbers,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  22. 

X Memoir  of  M.  de  Koug£  upon  the  Origine  egyptienne  de 
V alphabet  phenicien,  read  before  the  Academie  des  Inscriptions, 
published  in  1874,  after  the  author’s  death. 

§ Phonetics  had  long  been  in  existence  among  the  Egyptians. 
What  the  Semites  did  was,  first,  to  suppress  the  ideographical 
part  and  the  consonantical  syllabic  part  of  words  ; second,  to  select 
a single  sign  for  each  sound,  in  place  of  the  Egyptian  homophones. 
This  is  rather  a systematisation  of  the  principle  of  phonetism  than 
a discovery  of  the  principle  itself.  (Note  of  M.  Maspero.) 

||  Stanislas  Julien,  Norm  sanscrits  dans  les  livres  chinois. 
(Paris,  1861). 


THE  BENI-ISRAEL  IN  EGYPT. 


US 


what  was  done  by  the  Japanese,  the  Coreans,  and  the 
Annamites,  when  they  extracted  very  reduced  alpha- 
bets from  the  infinite  variety  of  Chinese  characters. 
The  Hyksos  thus  laid  down  the  principles  of  alphabetic 
writing,  and  their  selection  of  twenty-two  characters, 
made  with  a very  accurate  appreciation  of  Semitic 
phonetics,  has  remained  an  established  fact.  Governed 
by  the  habits  of  Egyptian  hieroglyphics,  which  takes 
account  of  the  articulation  alone,  they  wrote  the  con- 
sonant only,  which  is  a quite  insignificant  omission 
from  the  Semitic  point  of  view,  but  which  became  of 
capital  importance  when  the  alphabet  of  twenty-two 
letters  was  adopted  by  other  races.  The  Greeks,  a 
thousand  years  later,  made  good  this  deficiency  by 
forming  vowels  from  the  Semitic  aspirates,  and  thus 
was  constituted  the  writing  which  all  peoples  have 
adopted.  Hebron  no  doubt  was  acquainted  with  the 
invention  of  the  Hittites  of  Zoan,  adopted  it,  and  pos- 
sessed writings  from  a very  remote  date.*  This  was 
probably  the  source  whence  the  Moabitesj*  and  the 
Israelites^  derived  it,  unless  we  prefer  to  suppose  that 
they  copied  it  direct  from  Zoan,  which  is  assuredly  not 
an  inadmissible  hypothesis. 

The  Hyksos  of  Zoan  could  not  fail  to  exercise  a great 

* Hence  perhaps  the  narrative  of  the  fourteenth  chapter  of 
Genesis.  The  Khetas  were  familiar  with  handwriting  about  1300 
b.o.  Maspero’s  Histoire,  pp.  224,  225. 

f The  oldest  Moabite  inscription  is  that  of  Mesa,  about  875 
B.O. 

X The  oldest  known  Israelite  inscription  is  that  of  the  tunnel  of 
Siloh,  at  Jerusalem,  about  700  b.o. 


1 1 6 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


influence  upon  the  Hebrews  who  were  encamped  around 
Hebron,  the  Dead  Sea,  and  in  the  southern  districts 
of  Palestine.  The  antipathy  which  afterwards  existed 
between  the  Hebrews  and  the  Canaanites  was  not  as 
yet  very  perceptible.  The  harvests  in  Egypt  being 
much  more  regular  than  in  southern  Syria,  the  Khetas 
sometimes  received  from  the  Egyptian  kings  gifts  of 
corn.*  From  Kades-Barne  or  Gerar  to  the  cantons 
fertilised  by  the  Pelusiac  branches  of  the  Nile  it  was 
not  much  more  than  a hundred  and  fifty  miles.  The 
Bedouin,  as  I have  already  said,t  had  a double  feeling 
towards  organised  civilisation : upon  the  one  hand 
aversion,  due  to  the  keenest  of  all  jealous  motives,  that 
of  impotence ; upon  the  other  hand  an  almost  exces- 
sive admiration.  The  products  of  civilisation  were 
quite  beyond  him;  he  regarded  them  as  being  really 
miraculous.  The  resultant  of  these  contradictory  sen- 
timents was  upon  the  whole  an  attracting  influence ; for 
the  greatest  delight  of  the  semi-barbarian  is  to  gather 
where  he  has  not  planted.  The  comfort  enjoyed  and 
the  profit  made  in  this  to  him  unknown  world  fasci- 
nated him  like  a mirage.  He  admired  everything, 
down  to  the  bread  which  he  ate  and  the  onions  on 
which  he  fed ; but  he  soon  grew  dissatisfied  with  the 
small  value  attached  to  his  services  and  the  amount 
of  work  expected  from  him  in  return.  A kind  of 
nostalgia  gained  hold  upon  him  ; and  finding  himself 
treated  as  a labourer,  his  one  thought  was  how  he 

* Maspero,  p.  255. 

f See  above,  p.  54  and  following. 


THE  TEAT- ISRAEL  IN  EGYPT. 


ll7 


should  effect  his  exodus  at  any  sacrifice,  only  to  regret 
as  soon  as  he  had  succeeded  the  wages  which  he  re- 
ceived and  the  onions  which  he  ate  in  what  he  calls 
his  u house  of  bondage.”  * 

Things  are  still  much  the  same  in  the  present  day. 
The  infiltration  of  Arabs  into  Lower  Egypt  is  going 
on  upon  a large  scale.  The  Arab  remains  for  a while 
distinct,  and  is  exempted  from  forced  labour,  but  in 
time  he  becomes  assimilated  with  the  fellah,  and  is  not 
in  any  way  to  be  distinguished  from  the  rest  of  the 
population. 

There  are  the  best  of  reasons  for  believing  that  the 
immigration  of  the  Beni-Israel  took  place  at  two  sepa- 
rate times.t  A first  batch  of  Israelites  seems  to  have 
been  attracted  by  the  Hittites  of  Egypt,  while  the 
bulk  of  the  tribe  was  living  upon  the  best  of  terms 
with  the  Hittites  of  Hebron.  These  first  immigrants 
found  favour  with  the  Egyptianised  Hittites  of  Mem- 
phis and  Zoan ; they  secured  very  good  positions,  had 
children,  and  constituted  a distinct  family  in  Israel. 
This  was  what  was  afterwards  called  the  clan  of  the 
Josephel , or  the  Beni-Joseph.  Finding  themselves  well 
off  in  Lower  Egypt,  they  sent  for  their  brethren,  who, 
impelled  perhaps  by  famine,  joined  them  there,  and 
were  received  also  favourably  by  the  Hittite  dynasties. 
These  new-comers  never  went  to  Memphis.  They  re- 
mained in  the  vicinity  of  Zoan,  where  there  is  a land 

* Exodus,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  3,  14;  ch.  xx.,  v.  2. 

t Read  carefully  Genesis,  ch.  xlviii.,  v.  1 and  following. 


1 18  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


of  Goslien,*  which  was  allotted  to  them,  and  in  which 
they  could  continue  their  pastoral  life.  The  land  of 
Goshen,  in  fact,  was  as  it  were  a transition  between 
Egypt  and  the  desert.  The  Egyptians,  very  hostile  to 
herdsmen,!  as  sedentary  agriculturists  always  are, 
abandoned  it  to  the  populations  who  earned  their  live- 
lihood by  the  rearing  of  flocks. 

The  whole  of  these  ancient  days,  concerning  which 
Israel  possesses  only  legends  and  contradictory  tradi- 
tions, is  enveloped  in  doubt ; one  thing,  however,  is 
certain,  viz.,  that  Israel  entered  Egypt  under  a dynasty 
favourable  to  the  Semites,  and  left  it  under  one  which 
was  hostile.^  The  presence  of  a nomad  tribe  upon 
the  extreme  confines  of  Egypt  must  have  been  a matter 
of  ver}'  small  importance  for  this  latter  country. § 
There  is  no  certain  trace  of  it  in  the  Egyptian  texts. J| 
The  kingdom  of  Zoan,  upon  the  contrary,  left  a deep 
impression  upon  the  Israelites.  Zoan  became  nearly 
synonymous  with  Egypt.  The  relations  between 

* What  is  now  the  Wadi,  near  Isma'ilia. 

f Genesis,  ch.  xliii.,  v.  32  ; ch.  xlvi.,  v.  34;  ch.  xlvii.,  v.  6. 

J The  incoherent  narrative  which  Josephus  (Contre  Ajrion,  i.,  26, 
27)  attributes  to  Manethon  implies  at  all  events  the  connexity  of 
the  Hebrews  and  the  Hyksos. 

§ The  views  which  have  been  often  put  forward  as  to  the 
Semitic  origin  of  the  religious  reformation  of  Amenhotep  IY.  (worship 
of  Ivhunaten,  at  Tell  el-Amarna),  must  be  abandoned.  Aten,  which 
has  been  compared  to  Adon,  is  one  of  the  oldest  words  in  the 
Egyptian  language.  It  is  found  in  the  texts  of  the  Pyramids,  the 
wording  of  which  is  possibly  anterior  to  Menes.  (Note  of  M. 
Maspero.) 

||  Errors  of  Messrs.  Lauth  and  Chabas. 

^1  Isaiah,  ch.  xix.,  v.  11,  13;  ch.  xxx.,  v.  4;  Psalm  lxxviii., 


THE  BENI-1SRAEL  IN  EGYPT. 


119 

Zoan  and  Hebron  were  kept  up,  and  although  it 
is  very  doubtful  whether  the  chiefs  of  the  Beni- 
Israel  at  this  remote  epoch  had  their  burial-places 
at  Hebron,*  it  may  easily  be  believed  that  the  two 
capitals  of  the  Hittites  retained  the  consciousness 
of  their  common  origin.  Hebron  was  proud  of  the 
synchronism,  which  made  it  out  seven  years  older 
than  Zoan.j* 

The  first-comers,  the  Josephites,  always  assumed  an 
air  of  superiority  over  their  brethren,  whose  position 
they  had  been  instrumental  in  establishing. ;{:  These 

Josephites  were,  it  would  appear,  men  of  higher  cul- 
tivation than  their  fellows.  Their  children,  born  in 
Egypt,  possibly  of  Egyptian  mothers,  were  scarcely 
Israelites.  An  agreement  was  come  to,  however ; it 
was  agreed  that  the  Josephites  should  rank  as  Israelites 
with  the  rest.  They  formed  two  distinct  tribes,  those 
of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh.  Outside  these  two  families 
there  were  also  the  sporadic  Josephites,  who  several 
times  set  up  their  claims.  But  it  was  decided  that 
they  should  attach  themselves  as  best  they  could  to  the 
two  families  of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh. § It  is  not 
impossible  that  the  origin  of  the  name  of  Joseph  (addi- 

v.  11,  43.  It  should  be  added  that  this  is  mainly  owing  to  the 
important  part  which  the  Tanite  dynasty  (the  21st)  played  in  the 
time  of  Solomon,  and  to  the  power  of  the  feudal  princes  of  Zoan 
under  the  22nd,  24th,  and  25th  dynasties.  (Note  of  M.  Maspero.) 

* Genesis,  ch.  xxiii. 

t Numbers,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  22. 

| Genesis,  ch.  xxxvii.,  v.  8,  &c. 

§ Genesis,  ch,  xlviii. 


120  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


tion,  adjunction,  annexation)  may  have  arisen  from 
the  circumstance  that  the  first  emigrants  and  their 
families,  having  become  strangers  to  their  brethren, 
needed  some  sort  of  adjunction  to  become  again  part 
and  parcel  of  the  family  of  Israel. 


CHAPTER  XI. 


INFLUENCE  OF  EGYPT  UPON  ISRAEL. 

This  peaceful  sojourn  of  Israel  in  tlie  land  of  Goshen 
may  have  been  a somewhat  lengthy  one,  but  infinitely 
less  so  than  is  generally  supposed.*  I will  put  it  at  a 
century.  The  position  of  Israel  during  this  sojourn 
was  a stable  and  organised  one,  but  not  sufficiently  so 
to  exercise  upon  the  spirit  of  the  people  an  action  deep 
enough  to  modify  their  patriarchal  ideas,  or  to  sub- 
stitute for  the  old  stock  of  Babylonian  traditions 
which  they  carried  with  them  the  fables  of  Egypt. 
Just  as  the  Hyksos  had  given  to  their  worship  of  Sydyk 
the  forms  of  the  Egyptian  religion,  so,  in  a certain 
measure,  the  Beni-Israel  must  have  brought  their 
ancient  worship  into  keeping  with  the  taste  of  their 
new  country ; or  rather  they  must  have  added  to  this 
worship  of  Bedouin  simplicity  observances  which  they 
saw  practised  around  them,  wfith  a complete  belief  in 
their  efficacy.  Some  parts,  afterwards  regarded  as 
essential,  of  the  religion  of  Israel,  date  from  this 
period,  and  so  it  was  that  Egypt,  although  profoundly 

* There  is  no  reliable  chronology  in  regard  to  this.  The  texts 
are  uncertain,  contradictory,  and,  in  addition,  devoid  of  historical 
value. 


i22  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


pagan,  came  to  introduce  several  important  elements 
into  the  religious  tradition  of  humanity. 

Egypt  had  possessed,  from  the  earliest  times,  sacred 
texts  and  a somewhat  extensive  religious  literature. 
There  is  no  ground  for  believing  that  these  texts  had 
the  slightest  influence  upon  the  Israelites.  The  latter 
did  not  understand  Egyptian,  and  even  if  the  alphabet 
of  twenty-two  letters  existed  they  did  not  make  use  of 
it.  The  probability  is  that  not  one  of  the  Hebrew 
emigrants  had  anything  to  do  with  the  priests  who 
taught  the  more  or  less  elevated  mysteries  of  Egyptian 
theology.  They  would  doubtless  not  have  come  across 
a single  one  of  these  hierophants  in  the  district,  itself 
scarcely  Egyptian,  in  which  they  dwelt.  Moreover, 
speculative  doctrines  such  as  these,  even  supposing 
them  to  be  serious,  were  not  at  all  in  keeping  with 
the  bent  of  their  intellect.  Nothing  of  what  was  rare 
or  learned  came  to  their  ears.  The  Israelite  saw 
Egypt  as  the  Mussulman  Arab  sees  pagan  countries, 
entirely  from  the  outside,  perceiving  only  the  surface 
and  external  things.  Everything  underwent  a singular 
transformation  as  seen  through  their  narrow  range  of 
vision. 

The  comparisons  between  the  Bible  and  Egyptian 
learning  which  would  imply  a thorough  knowledge  of 
the  secrets  of  Egypt  must  then  be  rejected.  What  is 
called  the  Decalogue  is  very  analogous  to  the  negative 
confession  of  the  dead  man  before  Osiris  at  the  hour  of 
judgment.*  But  there  is  no  date  for  these  little  codes 
* Book  of  the  Dead,  ck.  125. 


INFLUENCE  OF  EGYPT  UPON  ISRAEL. 


123 


of  eternal  moral  philosophy  ; as  a rule  they  exist  long 
before  they  are  committed  to  writing.  Egypt,  far 
from  having  perfected  the  Israelitish  religion,  in  my 
opinion  altered  it  in  many  respects  for  the  worse. 

The  Egyptian  worship  was  a very  idolatrous  one ; 
the  god  dwelt  in  a fixed  place,  a temple,  an  ark,  or 
statues,  and  the  rites  celebrated  in  his  honour  were 
very  complicated.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Israel, 
like  the  Ilyksos,  were  affected  by  the  contagion  of  these 
ideas.  It  is  not  likely  that  the  desire  to  return  to  the 
nomad  life  had  so  far  abandoned  them  that  they  built 
temples  in  the  land  of  Goshen ; but  one  usage  which 
they  adopted  was  that  of  arks  or  tabernacles,  shielding 
behind  the  hawks  which  faced  each  other,  and  under 
another  large  oblique  wing,  forming  a kind  of  veil, 
the  image  of  the  god,  invisible  to  the  profane.  In 
the  Egyptian  rite  this  small  closed  chapel  was  always 
placed  upon  a bark  which  the  priests  carried  upon 
their  shoulders  in  procession  or  during  the  peregri- 
nations of  the  god.  It  was  a portable  naos , by  means 
of  which  the  god  could  at  times  undertake  long 
journeys  without  being  deprived  on  the  way  of  any 
of  his  honours.*  From  the  time  of  their  sojourn  in 
the  land  of  Goshen  the  Israelites  no  doubt  made  for 
themselves  an  ark  of  this  kind  to  serve  as  a centre  for 

the  somewhat  eclectic  worship  which  they  performed. 

% 

* De  Bouge,  Etude  sur  une  stele  egyptienne  de  la  Bibl.  Imp. 
Paris,  1858  ; de  Vogue,  le  Temple  de  Jerusalem,  p.  33.  Lepsius, 
Denkm.  Abth.  iii. , Bl.  189  b ; Wilkinson,  A Popular  Account  of  the 
Ancient  Egyptians,  vol.  i.,  pp.  267,  270. 

L 


I24  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


They  probably  carried  it  with  them  when  they  left 
the  country.  This  ark  was  the  most  appropriate 
thing  possible  for  nomad  life.  It  followed  them  in 
all  their  wanderings  through  the  peninsula  of  Sinai, 
and  we  shall  find  it  assuming  extraordinary  importance 
and  becoming  the  cradle  of  all  the  religious  institutions 
of  Israel.  The  bark,  wrhicli  was  an  essential  part  of 
the  Egyptian  ark,  disappeared,  and  its  place  was  taken 
by  a species  of  large  chest,  fitted  with  staves  for  the 
bearers  and  covered  by  the  sphinxes  or  hawks  facing 
one  another  and  folding  back  their  wings  on  both  sides, 
so  as  to  constitute  in  the  space  between  a sort  of  divine 
throne.* * * §  As,  in  the  popular  language  of  the  Israelites, 
a sphinx  was  called  a cherub , the  privilege  of  being 
seated  between  the  cherubim  became  as  a matter  of 
course  the  essential  privilege  of  the  national  god.j* 

The  consecrated  loaves,  placed  upon  a table  before 
the  god,  were  one  of  the  bases  of  Egyptian  worship.  J 
The  Israelites  adopted  this  rite  and  put  it  in  practice  as 
soon  as  it  was  applicable,  that  is  to  say  as  soon  as  their 
worship  had  some  sort  of  stability  about  it.  These 
loaves  were  without  leaven,  this  being  regarded  as  a 
special  condition  of  purity. § To  put  them  to  a secular 
use  was  regarded  as  a sacrilege  which  the  only  ex- 
tremest  necessity  could  justify. 

* Exodus,  ch.  xxv.,  xxxvii. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  iv.,  v.  4 ; Second  Book  of  Samuel 
ch.  vi.,  v.  2 ; Psalm  lxxx.,  v.  2 ; xcix.,  v.  i.,  &c. 

% Vogue,  see  above. 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxi. ; Hosea,  ch.  ix.,  v.  4. 


INFLUENCE  OF  EGYPT  UPON  ISRAEL. 


125 


Tims  the  Israelites  became  acquainted  with  the 
externals  only  of  the  Egyptian  religion,  its  mum- 
meries and  its  fetiches.  The  serpent  god  haunted 
them  for  centuries,  both  as  a nightmare  and  a talis- 
man.* The  sacred  bulls,  the  Apis  of  Memphis,  the 
Mnevis  of  Heliopolis,  j*  and  the  Hathor  calves  seemed 
to  strike  them  more  even  than  anything  else.  J The 
unenlightened  part  of  the  Beni-Israel  adopted  these 
gilded  images  almost  as  gods  of  the  tribe,  and  we 
shall  find  the  people,  whenever  they  could  elude  the 
pressure  of  the  puritans,  reverting  to  these  visible 
protectors,  to  whom  a pompous  worship  was  paid. 
The  usage  of  cries  ( teroua ),  § of  loud  music,  of  dancing 
around  the  god — customs  which  seem  in  nowise  patri- 
archal— probably  date  from  these  times.  Circum- 
cision among  the  Beni-Israel  was  anterior  to  their 
coming  into  the  land  of  Goshen,  but  it  is  not  impos- 
sible that  their  sojourn  in  this  country,  where  the 
practice  was  almost  endemic,  ||  contributed  to  make  it 
a more  regular  custom. 

* Numbers,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  8 and  following ; Second  Book  of  Kings, 
ch.  xviii.,  v.  4. 

t Herodotus,  iii.,  28;  Diodorus  Siculus,  I.,  xxi.,  10;  Strabo, 
xvii.,  22. 

f Although  the  fact  has  been  denied,  “ there  are  Apis  and 
Mnevis  bulls  in  stone  and  metal,  some  of  the  stone  ones  being  of 
very  large  size,  like  the  Apis  of  the  Louvre,  which  belongs  to  the 
Sa'ite  epoch,  or  the  Mnevis  of  Boulacq,  which  dates  from  the  20th 
dynasty.”  (Maspero.)  The  reproductions  of  Hathor  are  still  more 
numerous. 

§ n^Vin,  perhaps  OptapftoQ,  triumphus,  which  do  not  appear  to 
be  Aryan  words. 

[1  See  above,  pp.  105,  106. 

L 2 


126  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


The  winged  dish,  flanked  by  the  urceus,  which 
made  so  great  an  impression  upon  the  Phoenicians  and 
became  the  essential  feature  of  their  art,* * * §  was  doubt- 
less also  adopted  by  the  Israelites.  The  oldest  Jewish 
seals  bear  this  symbol,  t The  sphinxes  certainly 
remained  impressed  upon  the  imagination  of  the  Israel- 
ites. The  cherubim  are  in  part  derived  from  them, 
though  these  chimerical  beings  have  several  times 
changed  in  shape,  in  accordance  with  the  caprices 
of  Oriental  fashion,  and  although  the  very  name  of 
cherub  seems  to  come  rather  from  the  direction  of 
Assyria.  What  relates  to  the  ephod , the  urim,  and  the 
thummim  in  the  Hebrew  writings  is  so  obscure  that 
no  accurate  idea  of  them  can  be  formed.  Here,  how- 
ever, the  influence  of  the  winged  globe,  flanked  by 
the  urceus,  seems  to  show  itself  again. ij:  The  replies  of 
Iahveh,  when  he  was  consulted  by  the  urim-thummim 
of  the  ancient  shape,  resembled  very  much  those  of 
the  Egyptian  gods.  § Upon  the  other  hand,  the  urim- 
thummim  of  the  breast-plate  of  the  Jewish  priests  was 
quite  analogous  with  the  costume  of  the  Egyptian 
j udges.  ||  The  sacerdotal  vestments  of  J erusalem  were, 

* Mission  de  Phenicie,  index,  p.  883. 

f Levy,  Siegel  und  Gemmen  (Breslau,  1869),  pp.  33  and  fol- 
lowing, pi.  iii.  ; de  Vogue,  Mel.  d'arch.  orient .,  pp.  131  and  follow- 
ing; Clermont-Ganneau,  in  the  Journal  asiatique,  Feb. -March, 
1883,  pp.  128  and  following. 

| See  below,  p.  228. 

§ See  below,  p.  229. 

||  Diodorus  Siculus,  I.,  xlviii.,  6;  Ixxv.,  5;  Elien,  Var.  hist., 

xiv.,  34. 


INFLUENCE  OF  EGYPT  UPON  ISRAEL.  127 

like  all  articles  of  luxury,  borrowed  from  Egypt.* 
At  the  remote  epoch  of  which  I am  speaking  there  is 
nothing  to  show  that  any  such  vestments  existed, 
though  the  use  of  linen  for  the  sacerdotal  surplices 
seems  to  have  been  an  imitation  from  Egypt,  and  a 
very  ancient  one  too.-]* 

What  also  appears  to  be  distinctly  Egyptian  is  the 
idea  of  persons  being  called  by  a sort  of  divine  heredi- 
tary vocation  to  have  charge  of  religious  things,  and 
of  their  alone  knowing  how  to  offer  worship  and  do 
honour  to  the  gods.  The  clergy  is  of  unquestionable 
Egyptian  origin.  Nothing  could  be  more  opposed  to 
the  spirit  of  the  patriarchal  society  in  which  the 
family  itself  kept  its  own  sacra.  From  the  time  of 
their  sojourn  in  Goshen  the  Israelites  probably  had 
ministers  of  this  kind,  of  Egyptian  origin,  whom  each 
family  kept  in  return  for  their  religious  services.  This 
was  what  was  called  a levi,  a word  which  appears  to 
signify  inqiiilinus,  an  adherent,  an  adjunct  to  the  tribe, 
an  alien.  $ 

It  may  be  that  this  word  was  only  produced  later, 
when  the  levis  formed  a sort  of  tribe  apart,  without 
any  land  of  their  own,  and  when  it  was  agreed 
that  Levi  had  been  a son  of  Jacob  to  whom  God 
assigned  no  lot  because  his  descendants  were  scattered 

* See  Ancessi’s  Vetements  du  grand  pretre  et  des  levites,  &c. 
Paris,  1875. 

t Herodotus,  ii.,  87  ; First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  ii.,  v.  18  ; Second 
Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  vi.,  v.  14,  &c. 

x qui  adhaserunt  or  adjuncti  sunt.  Isaiah,  xiv.,  v.  1 ; ch. 
lvi.,  v.  3. 


128  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 


among  the  other  tribes  and  sustained  by  them.  The 
name  of  Gershom,  borne  by  more  or  less  fabulous 
founders  of  the  Levitical  order,  apparently  alludes  to 
the  state  of  things  which  made  members  of  that  order 
strangers  wherever  they  went.* * * §  It  is  well,  in 
any  event,  to  observe  that  the  levi  is  not  in  any  way 
the  patriarchal  cohen.  Every  head  of  a family  was 
colien.  In  many  pious  tribes  the  chief  of  it  was 
called  colien ,t  while  the  notables  were  called  cohanim.% 
These  names  were  regarded  with  the  utmost  respect. 
The  Levite , on  the  contrary,  was  little  more  than 
a sexton,  having  to  do  with  the  material  side  of 
the  worship  only.  Thus  the  tribe  of  Levi  (to  employ 
the  expression  generally  used)  contributed  very 
little,  at  all  events  up  to  the  captivity,  towards 
religious  progress,  § and  none  of  the  great  prophets 
were  Levites.  Inferior  divination,  on  the  contrary, 
had  much  in  common  with  Egypt.  The  habit  of  con- 
sulting the  gods,  who  replied  by  signs,  was  one  of  the 
traits  of  the  Egyptian  religion.  ||  The  ephods  and  the 
diviners  who  drew  lots,  after  the  manner  of  the  Levite 
Micah,^J  are  probably  derived  thence. 

In  fine,  Egypt,  far  from  contributing  to  the  reli- 

* Note  the  singular  points  of  resemblance  between  Exodus,  cb. 
ii.,  v.  22  ; Judges,  cb.  xvii.,  v.  7 ; cb.  xviii.,  v.  30. 

t Exodus,  cb.  iii.,  v.  1. 

J Job,  xii.,  v.  19. 

§ The  Levitical  origin  of  Moses  is  an  a priori  supposition  of 
comparatively  modern  date. 

||  See  p.  229. 

H Judges,  cb.  xvii.,  xviii. 


INFLUENCE  OF  EGYPT  UPON  ISRAEL.  129 


gious  progress  of  Israel,  put  obstacles  and  dangers  in 
the  path  that  the  people  of  God  was  to  tread.  It  was 
in  Egypt  that  originated  the  11  golden  calf,”  that 
perpetual  stumbling-block  of  the  masses,  the  brazen 
serpent  which  the  puritans  abhorred,*  the  lying  oracles, 
the  Levite,  who  was  the  leper  of  Israel,  and  perhaps 
circumcision,  which  was  its  greatest  error,  and  was 
at  one  time  very  nearly  upsetting  its  destinies.  With 
the  exception  of  the  ark,  Egypt  introduced  nothing 
but  disturbing  elements,  which  had  afterwards  to  be 
eliminated,  in  some  cases  by  violent  means.  It  was 
not  the  same  with  the  data  borrowed  from  the 
Chaldseans.  All  of  these  were  fruitful,  and,  with  the 
exception  perhaps  of  the  unpronounceable  name,  re- 
mained pillars  of  the  religion.  The  believing  part  of 
humanity  finds  its  life  in  them  still,  and  owes  to  these 
ancient  fables  a whole  prehistoric  epoch  in  which 
it  finds  much  delight,  and  a cosmogony  of  which  it  is 
very  proud.  The  genius  of  Israel  does  not  come  from 
Chaldeea,  but  Chaldaea  supplied  it  with  the  ten  first 
pages  of  the  book  which  has  enabled  it  to  gain  so 
unrivalled  a success. 

Egypt,  upon  the  contrary,  furnished  it  with  few 
fruitful  germs.  And  how  many  exquisite  creations  it 
nipped  in  the  bud  ! In  Egypt  we  see  the  last  of  the 
stately  Jakobelite  life,  and  of  those  grand  types  of 
aristocrats,  proud,  honourable,  and  serious  in  religion. 
Authority  passed  out  of  the  hands  of  the  chief  of  the 

* Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  4 ; and  Ezekiel  believed 
that  Israel  was  idolatrous  in  Egypt,  ch.  xx.,  v.  7 and  following. 


1 3o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


tribe,  and  became  in  a measure  democratised.  Hence- 
forward the  masses  were  to  have  a voice  in  affairs,  and 
this  voice  would  not  always  be  raised  in  favour  of 
religious  puritanism.  The  worship  of  the  Elohim 
came  to  be  regarded  as  insipid,  and  with  the  people 
ever  looking  back  regretfully  to  the  vulgarities  of 
Egypt,  it  was  found  necessary  to  appease  them  by 
raising  statues  of  Apis  with  golden  horns. 

In  the  social  and  political  order,  the  change  which 
took  place  in  Israel  from  its  sojourn  in  the  land  of 
Goshen  was  a very  considerable  one.  During  the 
century  which  it  passed  in  Egypt  Israel  had  multi- 
plied exceedingly.  The  spirit  of  the  nomad  tribe  had 
gradually  been  fading  away.  At  the  patriarchal  epoch 
we  do  not  find  a single  instance  of  a revolt  against  the 
patriarch,  for  his  authority  was  a purely  moral  one. 
Dut  now  absolute  government  had  begotten  its  counter- 
part : the  revolutionary  spirit.  The  masses,  soured 
by  the  functionaries  of  Pharaoh,  frequently  revolted 
against  their  chiefs.  These  mild  pastoral  families, 
whose  passage  the  sedentary  populations  used  to  wel- 
come with  delight,  had  become  a hard,  obstinate,  and 
“ stiff-necked  ” people.  Their  approach  excited  uni- 
versal apprehension  ; they  were  an  enemy.  Fierce 
towards  all  whom  they  found  in  their  path,  the  trans- 
formation had  taken  place : Israel  was  no  longer  a 
tribe,  but  a nation.  Alas ! wre  have  never,  since  the 
world  began,  seen  or  read  of  a merciful  nation ! 


CHAPTER  XII. 


EXODUS  OF  ISRAEL. 

Egyptian  civilisation,  the  history  of  which  has  so 
many  analogies  with  that  of  China,  has  this  peculiar- 
ity, that,  often  as  it  has  been  invaded  by  the  stranger, 
it  has  invariably  absorbed  the  invader,  and  has  always, 
after  a given  time,  gone  back  to  the  original  level 
which  the  invasion  had  displaced.  While  the  Hyksos 
were  reigning  in  Lower  Egypt,  ancient  Egypt,  some- 
times tributary  but  in  reality  autonomous,  continued 
to  lead  an  unaltered  life  at  Thebes.  A long  series  of 
wars  resulted  in  a victory  for  the  native  party.  The 
18th  and  19th  dynasty  founded  a new  empire,  more 
powerful  than  all  those  which  had  succeeded  one 
another  in  the  Nile  Valley.  Erom  being  conquered, 
Egypt  in  her  turn  became  conqueror,  and  the  armies 
of  Thotmes  and  Rameses  marched  in  triumph  over 
Syria. 

The  distinguishing  features  of  these  civilisations, 
the  origin  of  which  is  lost  in  the  night  of  time,  are  an 
immense  pride  and  an  utter  contempt  for  the  barba- 
rian, who  is  often  their  superior  in  energy  and  morality, 
and  who  has  an  abhorrence  of  mandarin-like  habits 
and  of  the  mania  for  administrative  routine.  Vic- 


132  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 


torious  by  her  perseverance,  Egypt  treated  the  Semites 
of  Egypt  and  Syria  as  a Chinese  governor  would  treat 
barbarian  rebels.  The  finest  Arab  tribes  seemed  to 
them  only  fit  to  throw  up  trenches  and  make  bricks. 
The  true  Egyptians  had  the  deepest  antipathy  for 
these  herders.  There  is  ground  for  believing  that 
some  of  the  Beni-Israel,  at  all  events  the  Josephites, 
had  participated  in  the  acts  and  favours  of  the  Hyk- 
sos.  But  all  this  was  changed  when  there  arose,  in 
the  words  of  the  ancient  narrator,  <£  a king  who  knew 
not  Joseph.”  The  Israelites  lost  all  the  privileges 
which  they  had  obtained  from  the  fallen  dynasty. 
They  fell  into  deep  distress,  and  in  order  to  gain  their 
living  they  were  obliged  to  become  labourers  and  do 
the  hardest  of  all  drudgery. 

Public  works  were  at  this  time  assumiug  an  extra- 
ordinary development  in  Egypt.*  In  the  region  of 
the  Isthmus,  more  particularly,  Pmmeses  II.  built  two 
large  towns,  Ta-toum,  a vast  assemblage  of  ware- 
houses and  the  ordinary  fortified  buildings,')*  and  Pa - 
Rameses-Aanakhtu  (the  city  of  the  very  brave  Eameses), 
which  was  in  a way  his  northern  capital.^:  He  also 

went  on  with  the  execution  of  the  canal  which  connected 

* Maspero,  Hist.  anc.  des  peuples  d'  Orient,  pp.  227  and  follow- 
ing. 

t II drov/j-oe  of  Herodotus,  ii.,  1 58.  It  is  Tell-el-Mashkutah. 
See  E.  Naville,  The  Store-city  of  Pithom  (London,  1885).  A great 
number  of  towns  in  this  region  were  named  Pa-toum.  Tell-el- 
Mashkutak  was  undoubtedly  the  Pa-toum  which  at  the  epoch  of 
the  Alexandrian  translators  was  identified  with  the  Pithom  of  the 
Bible. 

| Maspero,  op.  cit.}  pp.  221,  224,  228,  229. 


<7 


EXODUS  OF  ISRAEL. 


i33 


Lake  Ballah  and  the  Nile.*  In  order  to  execute 
these  works,  in  which  it  is  said  that  the  native  Egyptians 
took  no  part,t  it  was  necessary  to  call  in  the  help  of 
the  Bedouins  of  the  Sinaitic  peninsula  and  of  southern 
Canaan.  The  store-houses  of  Pithom  (or  Pa-toum) 
were  built  of  bricks  made  out  of  clay  and  chopped  straw, 
dried  in  the  sun.  The  Beni-Israel  were  employed  in 
making  these  bricks,  which  would  not  have  been  a 
very  difficult  task  if  they  had  not  at  times  been 
obliged  to  go  and  find  straw.  For  noble  tribes,  which 
regarded  all  labour  as  degrading,  this  was  the  height 
of  shame  and  misery.  Perpetual  quarrels  went  on 
between  the  poor  wretches  who  declared  that  they 
were  overdone  with  work,  and  the  rigid  taskmasters 
who  met  each  complaint  with  the  unvarying  reply 
ever  addressed  to  servile  labour,  li  Be  off  with  you ; 
you  are  idle  fellows.” 

During  the  long  reign  of  Pmmeses  II.,  all  idea  of  a 
revolt  was  out  of  the  question,  but  the  military  achieve- 
ments of  this  reign,  and  the  extraordinary  amount  of 
building  that  marked  its  progress,  produced  their  ordi- 
nary effect.  The  last  years  of  the  Egyptian  Louis  XIV. 
were  marked  by  a very  decided  decadence.  The 
reign  of  Menephtah,  his  successor,  witnessed  the 
commencement  of  the  reverses  which  were  to  follow. 
Barbarians  of  every  kind,  Carians,  Lycians,  Pelasgi, 
Mmonians,  Tyrrhenians,  Lydians,  and  Libyans,  swooped 
down  upon  the  west  of  the  Delta,  desirous  not  only  of 

* Maspero,  p.  228. 

f Diodorus  Siculus,  I.,  lvi.,  2. 


i34  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


plundering  but  of  establishing  themselves  there. # 
Menephtah  defeated  them  at  first,  but  eventually  the 
barbarians  gained  their  ends.  It  is  from  this  invasion 
that  I date  the  establishment  of  the  Philistines  j*  upon 
the  coast  adjoining  Egypt,  a country  in  which  the  Ca- 
naanite  race  was  very  scanty.  Under  Seti  II.  the  Pha- 
raohs’ power  had  become  very  weakened,  and  Egjrpt 
was  practically  powerless  beyond  her  frontiers,  while 
at  home  she  was  a prey  to  social  decomposition.  The 
slaves  rose  in  revolt,  and  in  many  places  the  Asiatics 
who  had  been  taken  prisoners  and  condemned  to  very 
severe  labour,  declared  themselves  masters  of  the 
country.}:  Large  bands  of  them  reached  The  Sinaitic 

peninsula,  a poverty-stricken  country  no  doubt,  but 
one  in  which  they  at  all  events  escaped  the  task- 
master’s whip. 

Among  the  fugitives  were  the  Beni-Israel,  who, 
while  domiciled  in  Goshen,  had  never  quite  lost  their 

* De  Rouge,  Ptevue  archeol.,  July  aud  August,  18G7. 

+ Maspero,  Hist,  anc.,  pp.  267,  270.  The  relationship  between 
this  name  and  the  Pelasgi  is  very  doubtful ; the  Cretan  origin  of 
the  Philistines  is,  upon  the  contrary,  almost  certain.  The  language 
of  the  Philistines  appears  to  have  been  a Greco-Latin  dialect.  The 
comparisons  Akis  = Anchises,  Goliath  = Galeatus,  and  some  others 
are  also  very  conjectural.  But  in  the  second  volume  of  this  work 
I shall  endeavour  to  show  that  certain  Greek  and  Latin  words 
which  have  existed  in  Hebrew  from  a very  remote  date,  such  as 
parhar  = peribolos,  mekera  = fxa^aipct,  mekone  = machina,  pilegs 
= pellex , liska  = Ae'cr;^,  were  introduced  in  David’s  time  by  the 
influence  of  the  Philistines.  See  the  typical  portrait  of  the  Philis- 
tines in  Lepsius,  Denkrn.,  iii.,  211. 

j;  Diodorus  Siculus,  I.,  lvi. , 3 and  following;  Maspero,  pp.  261, 
262. 


EXODUS  OF  ISRAEL. 


1 3 5 


nomad  habits.  The  Bedouins,  like  the  Amalekites, 
whom  they  constantly  saw  encamped  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  Bitter  Lakes,  excited  their  envy  and 
brought  with  them,  so  to  speak,  the  wind  of  the 
desert.  It  would  seem  that  it  was  at  Pa-Bameses, 
where  they  were  assembled  for  brickmaking,  that  the 
Israelites  formed  their  plan  for  escaping.  The  Levis 
and  other  low-class  Egyptians  who  had  got  mixed  up 
with  them,  and  had  become  more  or  less  incorporated 
with  them,  entered  into  the  plot.  A few  of  the  free 
Egyptians  who  had  reason  to  be  discontented  with  the 
dynasty  may  also  have  joined  in  it.*  The  singular 
thing  is  that  the  Beni-Israel  should  afterwards  have 
prided  themselves  on  having  spoiled  the  Egyptians  of 
Pa-Kameses  by  carrying  off  with  them  valuable 
objects  which  they  had  borrowed  of  them.t 

What  are  we  to  think  of  the  man  who  has  come  to 
stand  out  as  a colossus  among  the  great  mythical 
figures  of  humanity,  and  to  whom  the  ancient  narra- 
tives attribute  the  principal  part  in  this  exodus  of 
Israel.^  It  is  very  difficult  to  give  an  answer. 
Moses  is  completely  buried  by  the  legends  which 
have  grown  up  over  him,  and  though  he  very  pro- 
bably existed,  it  is  impossible  to  speak  of  him  as  we 

* Exodus,  ch.  xii.,  v.  38;  Numbers,  ch.  xi.,  v.  4. 

I A detail  which  now  seems  incomprehensible.  It  formed  part, 
however,  of  the  oldest  narrative.  See  Dillmann  upon  Exodus,  ch. 
iii.,  v.  21,  22.  Exodus,  ch.  xi.,  v.  1 and  following;  Exodus,  ch. 
xii.,  v.  36. 

I The  alleged  Egyptian  texts  relating  to  Moses  have  none  of 
them  stood  the  test  of  careful  criticism. 


IS 6 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL, 


do  of  other  deified  or  transformed  men.*  His  name 
appears  to  be  Egyptian,  j"  Mose  is  probably  the  name 
of  Ahmos,  Amosis,  shortened  at  the  beginning.^: 
According  to  the  prevalent  tradition,  Moses  was  a 
Levi ,§  and  we  have  seen  that  this  name  probably  was 
used  to  designate  the  Egyptians  whose  services  were 
required  for  the  worship  and  who  followed  Israel  into 
the  desert.  The  name  of  Aharon,  perhaps,  is  derived 
in  a similar  way.  Moses  appears  to  us  at  first  as 
having  been  brought  up  by,  and  being  a functionary 
of,  the  Egyptians.  The  fact  of  his  killing  an 
Egyptian  in  a moment  of  instinctive  indignation  has 

* Moses,  from  the  historic  point  of  view,  cannot  be  at  all  com- 
pared with  Jesus.  St.  Paul  admits  Jesus  to  have  been  a person 
who  in  reality  existed.  Now  St.  Paul  was  a contemporary  of 
Jesus;  he  was  converted  to  the  sect  four  or  five  years  after  the 
death  of  Jesus  (see  Epistles  to  the  Galatians).  The  oldest  docu- 
ments relating  to  Moses  are  four  or  five  centuries  posterior  to  the 
epoch  in  which  he  must  have  lived. 

f The  Alexandrian  Jews  had  some  suspicion  of  this.  Gesenius, 
Thes.,  p.  824. 

I It  is  difficult,  at  all  events,  to  overlook  the  element  mos , 
“ son,”  which  is  found  in  Thotmos,  Amenmos,  &c.  The  shortened 
form  Mom  is  sometimes  met  with  in  the  Egyptian  onomasticon.  It 
is  true  that  one  would  expect  to  find  in  the  Hebraic  transcription 
the  simple  sibilant,  and  not  the  chuintante.  See  de  Rouge,  Revue 
archeol.,  November,  1861,  p.  354  ; August,  1867,  pp.  87 — 89.  But 
where  are  we  to  learn  how  the  Hebrews,  who  first  wrote  the  name 
of  about  1000  or  1100  b.c.,  pronounced  the  schin  ? It  was 
just  the  time  when  one-half  of  Israel  used  the  word  sibboleth.  The 
W and  the  w also  are  used  indifferently  in  the  old  way  of  writing 
the  name  of  Israel  ( Iesurun , &c.).  See  above,  p.  90,  Note  *.  As 
a rule,  in  ante-scriptural  Semitic  etymology,  the  lie  and  the  heth, 
the  schin  and  the  sin  may  be  regarded  as  one  single  letter. 

§ Exodus,  ch.  ii.,  v.  1. 


EXODUS  OF  ISRAEL. 


J37 


nothing  improbable  about  it.  His  relations  with  the 
Arab  Midianites,  a species  of  Hebrews  not  reduced  to 
servitude  by  Egypt,  and  with  the  Idumean  Kenites, 
especially  with  a certain  Ieter  or  Jethro,*  whose 
daughter  he  is  said  to  have  married,  also  seem  to  have 
a semi-historical  character.  With  regard  to  whether 
he  was  really  the  leader  of  the  revolt  and  the  guide  of 
fugitive  Israel,  it  is  unquestionably  quite  possible 
that  an  Egyptian  functionary  of  mixed  race,  told  off 
to  keep  watch  over  his  brethren,  may  have  played  a 
part  similar  to  that  of  the  mulattos  of  St.  Domingo 
and  been  the  author  of  the  deliverance.  But  it  is  also 
possible  that  all  these  narratives  of  the  Exodus,  into 
which  fable  has  penetrated  so  deeply,  may  be  even 
more  mythical  than  is  generally  supposed,  and  that 
the  only  fact  which  can  be  depended  upon  out  of  them 
all  is  the  departure  from  Egypt  of  Israel  and  its 
entry  into  the  peninsula  of  Sinai. 

It  does  not  seem  as  if  the  Israelites  and  their  com- 
panions had  any  other  object  in  view,  before  they  left 
Pa-Bameses,  except  to  escape  the  tyranny  of  Pharaoh. 
If  they  had  then  the  idea  of  conquering  that  land  of 
Canaan  in  which  their  ancestors  had  wandered  as 
nomads,  it  must  have  been  in  a very  crude  form. 
The  first  thing  was  to  get  out  of  Egypt,  and 
two  routes  lay  before  them,  one  being  in  a north- 

* Exodus,  ch.  iv.,  xviii.  The  termination  o is  a peculiarity  of 
the  Arameo-Arabic  dialects  of  the  Midianite  region  (Sinaitic  and 
Nabathean  inscriptions).  Upon  the  other  hand  the  forms  "in\ 
*nn\  Tin',  snn'  lead  one  to  take  bsnrp  as  the  name  of  a tribe. 
See  above,  pp.  80,  81,  89. 


1 38  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

easterly  direction  to  the  Mediterranean  coast,  and 
then  along  the  one  high  road  which  had  from  the 
earliest  times  connected  Syria  and  Egypt  along  the 
sea-sliore.  But  the  nomads  did  not  like  following  a 
highway,  while  the  capital  reason  which  prevented 
them  from  taking  this  direction  was  that  they  would 
after  a few  days’  march  have  encountered  the  Philis- 
tines, then  in  the  full  flush  of  their  military  organisa- 
tion.* The  Israelites  and  the  emigrants  who  accom- 
panied them  were  scarcely  armed  at  all,  and  a struggle 
with  these  rude  warriors  would,  therefore,  have  been 
a hopeless  one.t  So  it  was  resolved  to  go  in  a south- 
easterly direction,  and  reach  the  peninsula  of  Sinai  as 
quickly  as  possible.  In  three  days’  march  they  reached 
what  the  Semites  called  Pi-hahirot  (to-day  Kalaat- 
Agrud),  opposite  the  entrenched  camp  of  the  Hyksos, 
abandoned  or  destroyed  since  the  time  of  Ahmos  I. 

That  branch  of  the  Red  Sea  which  in  our  days 
terminates  at  Suez  on  a very  shallow  shore,  then 
reached,  in  the  form  of  lagoons,  much  farther  inland, ;{: 
and  extended  by  a chain  of  lakes  or  underground 
infiltrations  to  the  basin  of  the  Bitter  Lakes.  In  reality 
the  waters  of  the  Red  Sea  reached  to  what  is  now 
known  as  the  ridge  of  Serapeum.  To  pass  from  Egypt 
into  Asia  leaving  this  to  the  north,  it  was  necessary  to 
cross  pools  of  water  belonging  to  the  Red  Sea,  though  at 

* See  above,  pp.  134,  135. 

t Exodus,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  17,  18. 

| The  ruins  of  Colzoum  (Clysma),  where  people  embarked  for 
India  up  to  the  Middle  Ages,  are  now  two  leagues  inland.  Suez 
has  only  been  in  existence  since  the  Arab  conquest. 


EXODUS  OF  ISRAEL. 


*39 

certain  points,  owing  to  the  accumulation  of  sand,  the 
water  was  not  anlde-deep.  The  passage,  however, 
was  not  without  its  danger,  for  the  tide  in  these  narrow 
channels  would,  when  the  wind  was  in  a certain  direc- 
tion, and  at  certain  seasons  of  the  year,  be  very  capri- 
cious, and  those  who  were  not  careful  in  the  selec- 
tion of  their  time  might  well  be  surrounded  by  the 
waters  and  exposed  to  sink  in  the  quicksands.  ISTo 
doubt  the  popular  fancy  exaggerated  the  list  of  acci- 
dents which  really  happened,  and  found  pleasure  in 
relating  fictitious  episodes  of  caravans  and  armies 
being  submerged.*  It  may  reasonably  be  imagined, 
too,  that  at  this  critical  moment  of  the  journey  the 
mass  of  fugitives  was  seized  with  a panic  which  left  a 
deep  impression  behind  it.  But  the  popular  tales 
alone  about  the  dangers  of  the  passage  would  have 
furnished  a sufficient  basis  for  the  sacred  legend, 
marked  with  the  most  exuberant  spirit  of  the  marvel- 
lous which  afterwards  came  out  in  it. 

Among  the  fables  with  which  this  legend  teems, 
none  is  more  improbable  than  that  of  a pursuit  of 
the  fugitives  by  the  Egyptians,  ending  in  a hopeless 
disaster  to  Pharaoh’s  army.  Owing  to  the  dynastic 
weakness  of  Egypt,  the  rule  of  the  sovereigns  was 
little  more  than  nominal  in  the  Isthmus,  and  a fugitive 
who  had  got  beyond  the  Bitter  Lakes  was  certain  of 
his  freedom.  Moreover,  there  is  nothing  to  indicate 
that  the  Egyptian  Government  had  any  desire  to  keep 

* Compare  with  the  legends  of  the  “ Lieue  de  greve,”  in 
Brittany. 


M 


1 4o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


by  force  within  its  borders  a band  of  foreigners  whose 
presence  had  become,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  useless. 
All  that  was  afterwards  related  about  the  exodus  of 
Israel  proves  that  there  was  no  direct  record  of  it,  and 
that  in  the  age  and  place  where  the  legend  was  built 
up  no  one  had  any  precise  idea  of  the  time  and  cir- 
cumstances amid  which  the  event  occurred.* 

* The  song  of  Moses  in  Exodus  xv.  is  a literary  and  artificial 
composition  of  much  later  date. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


ISRAEL  IN  THE  DESERT  OF  PHARAN. 

Haying  escaped  from  what  they  always  called  u the 
house  of  bondage,”  the  people  of  Israel  found  them- 
selves face  to  face  with  what  is  perhaps  the  most 
inhospitable  desert  under  heaven.*  In  its  western 
part  it  is  known  as  the  Desert  of  Sur,f  while  farther 
east  it  was  called  Pharan.  Had  they  continued  their 
route  due  east  they  would  have  found  nothing  but  va- 
cuitylj:  and  death.  They  turned  towards  the  south-east, 
following  very  closely  the  sea,  or  rather  the  ancient 
route  which  the  Egyptians  had  traced  more  than  a 
thousand  years  before  for  working  the  Sinai  coppei 
mines. § The  want  of  water  was  the  most  cruel  de- 
privation. At  the  end  of  three  days  the  fugitives 
reached  a place  called  Mara,  on  account  of  its  brackish 

* Notwithstanding  the  entirely  legendary  character  of  the  nar- 
ratives about  the  Sinaitic  period,  the  diary  of  the  desert  contains 
many  serious  elements  which  cannot  be  altogether  disregarded. 
See  Robinson,  Dillmann,  and  the  Ordnance  Survey  of  the  Penin- 
sula of  Sinai,  by  Wilson,  Palmer,  &c.  (1869.) 

t Pococke  ( Descr .,  vol.  i.,  p.  139)  has  heard  it  called  Shedur. 
Perhaps  this  may  be  right ; might  be  a mistake  for  “nip. 

\ inn,  still  in  the  present  day  aJ,  Till. 

§ Serbout  el-Qadim,  Wadi-Maghara. 

M 2 


i42  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


waters.*  They  endeavoured,  by  the  infusion  of  certain 
boughs,  j*  to  render  it  potable,  but  only  with  indifferent 
success.  The  encampment  at  Elim  £ was  a less  trying 
one,  for  they  found  there  twelve  springs,  seventy 
palm-trees  and  tamarisk-trees,  which  afforded  them  a 
welcome  shade.  The  tribe  then  approached  nearer  to 
the  sea,  as  far  as  the  first  spurs  of  the  vast  mountain 
chain  of  Sinai.  The  desert  of  Sin  again  subjected 
them  to  severe  hardships,  for  it  is  a terrible  country, 
bare  and  waterless,  where  even  in  winter  the  flocks 
of  sheep  can  scarcely  find  sufficient  food. 

The  narratives  of  the  incidents  which  occurred  during 
this  march,  which  afterwards  became  the  basis  of  a 
religion,  or,  to  speak  more  correctly,  of  universal  reli- 
gion, all  of  them  attribute  the  principal  part  to  Mose. 
I have  already  pointed  out  that  this  theory  can  only 
be  accepted  with  considerable  reserve,  but  it  is  pro- 
bable, nevertheless,  that  the  activity  of  the  semi- 
Egyptian  Hebrew,  who  seems  to  have  had  much  to 
do  with  the  preparations  for  the  exodus,  was  again 
manifested  during  the  marches  through  the  desert. 
Another  Levite , named  Ahron,  or  Aharon  (an  Egyptian 
name,  perhaps),  stands  out  side  by  side  with  him,  as 
well  as  a woman  named  Miriam,  who,  according  to  the 
legend,  were  his  brother  and  sister.  Some  narratives  § 
attached  more  importance  to  these  persons  than  do  the 
versions  which  have  come  down  to  us. 

* Now  called  Ain-Howara. 

f Compare  with  Lesseps’s  I’Isthme  de  Suez  (Paris,  1864),  p.  10. 

J Wadi  Gharondel. 

§ Micah,  ch.  vi.,  v.  4. 


ISRAEL  IN  THE  DESERT  OF  PH  A RAN.  143 

There  is  perhaps  some  foundation  for  what  we  are 
told  as  to  the  relations  which  Moses  established  with 
the  tribes  to  the  east  of  Egypt,*  and  these  relations 
would  have  been  useful  to  him  in  the  difficult  task 
which  he  had  assumed.  But  one  hesitates  about 
speaking  of  the  shadows  dimly  outlined  in  the  dark- 
ness of  profound  night  as  real  personages.  We  shall 
see  later  on  that  the  name  of  Aharon,  in  particular,  is 
open  to  quite  a different  explanation.  The  only  his- 
torical lines  which  we  possess  with  regard  to  these 
times — the  Song  of  Beer,t  in  which  we  can  trace  a clear 
allusion  to  what  was  afterwards  cited  as  a miracle  of 
Moses — show  us  the  sarim  (princes)  and  the  neclibe 
lia-am  (nobles  of  the  people),  carrying  staves  of  com- 
mand, and  effecting  with  these  staves,  without  any 
supernatural  intervention,  the  act  which  more  modern 
legends  attributed  to  Moses.  Nothing  can  be  further 
removed  than  this  short  song  from  the  idea  of  a single 
leader  inspired  of  God. 

Even  if  the  legendary  narratives  did  not  relate  to  us 
the  murmurings  and  daily  revolts  of  the  people  against 
the  leaders  who  had  brought  them  out  of  Egypt,  such 
scenes  might  be  inferred  a priori.  Man  is  sensitive 
to  his  present  misfortunes  only.  What  he  has  suffered 
always  appears  to  him  of  small  account  by  comparison 
with  what  he  is  suffering.  Hunger  and  thirst  caused 
the  slaves  of  yesterday  to  regret  the  onions  of  Egypt 
and  the  life  of  relative  abundance  which  they  had 

* See  above,  pp.  136,  137. 

t Numbers,  ck.  xxi.,  v.  17,  18  (taken  from  the  Jaslier). 


H4-  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 


enjoyed  tliere.  The  leaders  did  not,  in  these  circum- 
stances, hesitate  to  resort  to  any  of  the  impostures 
which  the  ancients  regarded  as  perfectly  legitimate. 
It  was  necessary  to  persuade  these  poor  waifs  that  the 
god  of  their  tribe  was  watching  over  them.  All  the 
incidents  of  the  route  were  made  to  serve  this  end. 
Whenever  a spring  of  water  was  discovered,  the  dis- 
covery was  attributed  to  a miracle.  Now  and  again 
the  wind  would  bring  upon  their  track  a flock  of 
quails,  and  this,  they  were  told,  was  due  to  the  god 
who  watched  over  them  and  wished  to  relieve  their 
distress. 

A trifling  source  of  relief  which  these  solitudes 
offer  the  traveller  was  afterwards  exaggerated,  to  a 
remarkable  degree,  by  the  legend.  It  often  happens 
that,  at  certain  seasons,  the  shrubs  in  the  desert  are 
covered  with  a sort  of  gummy  exudation,  by  means  of 
which  the  wanderers  succeed  in  slightly  apjieasing 
their  hunger.  This  is  what  the  Arabs  call  mann  es-sema , 
“ the  gift  of  heaven,”  or  simply  mann , “ the  gift,”  be- 
lieving that  this  excrescence  falls  from  heaven  like  a 
kind  of  white  frost.  The  Israelites  had  their  share  of 
this  trifling  succour,  and  in  after  days,  in  lands  where 
it  was  not  known  what  mann  was,  the  most  fantastic 
narratives  were  spun  upon  this  subject.  Manna  was 
described  as  the  bread  which  the  sons  of  God  eat  in 
heaven,  and  it  was  generally  accepted  that  God,  as  an 
act  of  special  favour,  had  for  some  time  fed  his  chosen 
people  with  angels’  food.* 

* Psalm  lxxviii.,  v.  25. 


ISRAEL  IN  THE  DESERT  OF  PII A RAN.  145 


The  real  miracle  would  have  been  that  the  Israelites 
were  able  to  live  in  the  desert  of  Sinai  if  they 
had  been  as  numerous  and  their  sojourn  had  been 
as  long  as  the  legend  asserts.  But  the  traditional 
story  on  this  point  is  certainly  full  of  exaggerations. 
The  band  of  fugitives  was  infinitely  smaller  than  the 
hyperbolical  figures  of  the  existing  text  would  lead  us 
to  believe ; in  the  second  place,  the  duration  of  their 
wanderings  was  not  nearly  so  long  as  is  supposed.* * * § 
The  fugitives  may  have  brought  away  with  them  some 
corn  and  provisions  from  Egypt.  With  the  valuable 
objects  which  they  laid  hands  upon,  if  the  narratives 
are  to  be  believed,  f they  may  have  procured  some- 
thing in  exchange  from  the  Ishmaelite  or  Midianite 
traders,  and  so  have  formed  a flock.  Perhaps,  too, 
the  peninsula  was  not  so  denuded  three  thousand 
years  ago  as  it  is  now.  J The  vegetable  mould  ap- 
pears to  have  spread  from  wadis  to  the  neighbouring 
plains. § Certain  valleys  were  formerly  dammed  so  as 
to  serve  as  a reservoir  for  the  winter  rains.  |[ 

* The  forty  years  (Amos,  ch.  ii.,  v.  10)  recall  the  forty  days’ 
journey  of  Elijah  to  Horeb  (First  Book  of  Kings,  ch  xix.,  v.  8). 
The  oldest  texts  did  not  make  any  calculation  of  the  length  of 
sojourn  in  the  desert. 

f Numbers,  ch.  xx.,  v.  19  (taken,  it  would  seem,  from  the  book 
of  the  Wars  of  Ialiveh),  would  lead  one  to  infer  that  they  had 
articles  of  value  with  them. 

J Ordnance  Survey,  part  i.,  pp.  28,  194,  and  following. 

§ I owe  this  information  to  the  Suez  Canal  Company. 

||  Dykes  have  been  found  which,  at  the  time  of  the  5th,  6th 
and  12th  dynasties,  formed  lakes,  around  which  were  clustered  the 
villages  of  the  Egyptian  miners.  (Note  of  M.  Maspero.) 


146  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

At  the  present  day  the  peninsula,  if  we  except  the 
convent  of  St.  Catherine,  is  peopled  by  a few  hundred 
Bedouins,  who  are  plunged  in  the  deepest  poverty. 
Formerly  the  population  was  beyond  doubt  larger.  The 
Amalekites  and  the  Midianites,  who  appear  to  have 
been  very  numerous  tribes,  lived  there  for  cen- 
turies:* Pharan,  which  is  identical  with  Eaphidim, 
afterwards  gave  its  name  to  the  Pharanites,j*  who,  in 
their  time,  were  of  almost  as  much  importance  as  the 
Saracens. 

The  route  of  Israel  through  the  desert  was  a pas- 
sage, not  a sojourn  ; but  the  impression  which  this 
short  period  of  miserable  existence  left  upon  the  minds 
of  the  people  was  very  deep.  All  the  circumstances, 
of  which  a more  or  less  distorted  recollection  was 
preserved,  were  regarded  as  sacramental,  and  the 
theocratic  caste  afterwards  moulded  them  to  the  pur- 
poses of  its  religious  policy.  The  slightest  incidents 
were  magnified,  and  the  manna  and  the  quails  were 
adduced  as  proofs  that  the  people  had  been  miracu- 
lously fed,  and  that  God  himself  had  been  their  guide, 
and  had  marched  before  them  in  the  way.  Upon  these 
vast  solitary  plains,  where  the  atmosphere  is  so  lu- 
minous, the  presence  of  a tribe  can  be  detected  from 
afar  by  the  smoke  which  ascends  straight  up  towards 
the  sky.  Night  time  is  often  chosen  for  a march,  and 
in  that  case  a lighted  beacon,  fastened  on  to  the  end 


* Genesis,  ch.  xxv.,  v.  18 ; First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xv.,  v.  7 ; 
ch.  xxvii.,  v.  8. 

t Ptolemseus,  V.,  xvii.  3. 


ISRAEL  IN  THE  DESERT  OF  PI1  A RAN.  147 


of  a long  pole,  is  often  used  as  a rallying  sign.*  Tliis 
column,  invisible  by  day,  luminous  by  night,  was  the 
very  God  of  Israel,  guiding  His  people  through  these 
solitudes,  j*  This  good  genius  of  the  desert  had  shown 
such  a special  affection  for  Israel  that  the  people  came 
to  invoke  him  in  a quite  personal  way.  The  God  who 
had  brought  Israel  out  of  Egypt  and  enabled  them  to 
live  in  “the  land  of  thirst”  was  not  the  absolute 
Elohim,  the  great  God,  King,  and  Providence  of  the 
whole  universe.  He  was  a god  who  had  a special 
affection  for  Israel,  who  had  bought  them  as  merchan- 
dise. How  far  we  are  here  from  the  ancient  patri- 
archal God,  just  and  universal  ! The  new  god  of 
whom  I am  speaking  is  in  the  highest  degree  partial. 
His  providence  has  only  one  aim,  and  that  is  to  watch 
over  Israel.  He  is  not  as  yet  the  god  of  a nation,  for 
a nation  is  the  produce  of  the  marriage  of  a group  of 
men  with  some  land,  and  Israel  has  no  land;  but  he 
is  the  god  of  a tribe  in  every  sense  of  the  word.  Great 
is  the  decadence  from  the  ancient  Jakobelite,  whose 
genius  finds  fresh  expression  in  the  Book  of  Job  and 
who  had  a far  higher  idea  of  God  and  of  the  universe. 

A protecting  god  needs  a proper  name,  for  the  pro- 
tecting god  is  a person;  he  becomes  identified  with 
those  whom  he  protects.  Israel  had  in  their  religious 
vocabulary  but  one  proper  name  for  God.  The  name 
of  Iahveh  which  the  ancient  nomads  had  brought  back 

* Quintus-Curtius,  V.,  ii.,  7 ; numerous  modern  testimonies, 
particularly  the  French  expedition  to  Egypt. 

f E odus,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  9. 


j48  HISTORY  OR  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


from  Padan-Aram,  or  Ur-Oasdim,  was  not,  like  El  or 
Eloliim,  a generic  name ; it  was  an  undeclinable,  in- 
flexible name,  analogous  to  the  Camos  of  the  Moabites. 
Py  a process  of  ideas  which  it  is  impossible  now  to 
follow  out,  the  protecting  god  of  Israel  was  called 
Iahveli.*  Each  step  towards  the  formation  of  the 
national  idea  was,  it  will  be  seen,  accompanied  by  a 
degradation  in  the  theology  of  Israel.  The  national 
idea  was  in  favour  of  a god  who  would  think  only  of 
the  nation,  who  in  the  interests  of  the  nation  would 
be  cruel,  unjust,  and  hostile  to  the  whole  human  race. 
Iahveism  commenced,  to  all  intents  and  purposes, 
when  Israel  adopted  self-interest  as  a national  prin- 
ciple ; and  it  grew  with  the  nation,  causing  the  ob- 
literation of  the  sublime  and  true  idea  of  the  primitive 
Elohism.  Fortunately  there  was  in  the  genius  of  Israel 
something  superior  to  national  prejudices.  The  old 
Elohism  was  never  to  die ; it  was  to  survive  Iahveism, 
or  rather  to  assimilate  it.  The  wart  was  to  be  extir- 
pated. The  prophets,  and  especially  Jesus,  the  last  of 
them,  will  expel  Iahveh,j*  the  exclusive  god  of  Israel, 

* Iahveh  appears  as  the  military  protector  of  Israel  immediately 
after  their  coming  out  of  Egypt.  It  is  true  that  such  a conception 
may  have  been  retrospective.  In  the  fragment  which  has  been  pre- 
served of  the  song  to  celebrate  the  capture  of  Heshbon,  the  victory 
of  Israel  is  not  attributed  to  Iahveh.  It  no  doubt  was  in  the  com- 
plete song,  inasmuch  as  Moab  is  called  in  it  “ the  people  of 
Chemosh.”  (Numbers,  xxi.,  v.  29.) 

t This  is  the  deep-rooted  idea  of  the  Gnostics  ; but  they  falsified 
it  by  shutting  their  eyes  to  the  fact  that  all  this  occurred  within  the 
limits  of  Judaism.  The  German  anti-Semites  of  our  day  are  guilty 
of  the  same  historical  injustice. 


ISRAEL  IN  THE  DESERT  OF  PHARAN.  i4g 

and  revert  to  the  noble  patriarchal  formula  of  one 
good  and  just  father  for  the  universe  and  the  human 
race. 

The  transition  from  idealism  to  nationalism  is  never 
effected  with  impunity.  Israel  was  not  the  only  people 
to  whom  the  adoption  of  a protecting  god  brought 
decadency ; and  Israel,  at  all  events,  had  the  courage 
to  try  and  counteract  the  effects  of  their  error.  By 
a series  of  efforts  long  sustained,  Israel  at  length 
returned  to  the  truth,  and  established,  in  place  of  the 
idea  of  the  national  god,  the  universal  idea  of  the 
Elion,  or  El-Shaddai,  of  the  patriarchs.  El  was  just 
towards  men,  though  his  justice  was  enveloped  in 
mystery.  Iahveh  is  not  just,  being  monstrously  par- 
tial towards  Israel  and  cruelly  severe  upon  other 
peoples.  He  loved  Israel  and  hated  the  rest  of  the 
world.  He  slew,  lied,  deceived,  and  robbed,  all  for 
the  benefit  of  Israel.  And  what  good  reasons  were 
there  for  believing  that  it  was  this  particular  god  who 
had  made  heaven  and  earth  ? All  this  constituted  a 
tissue  of  contradictions  which  the  genius  of  the  pro- 
phets gradually  overcame.  The  work  of  the  prophets 
consisted  in  re-creating,  by  reflection,  the  ancient 
Elohism,  in  forcibly  identifying  Iahveh  with  El-Elion, 
and  in  rectifying  the  twist  which  the  adoption  of  a 
particular  god  had  given  to  the  religious  direction  of 
Israel. 

A special  god,  being,  in  fact,  the  gravest  of  all 
philosophical  errors,  becomes  a source  of  constant 
deviations  for  the  people  who  give  themselves  over  to 


1 5o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


one.  Just  in  proportion  as  El  hacl  given  good  advice 
to  the  ancient  patriarchs  and  had  inspired  them  with 
an  elevated  notion  of  life,  so  did  Iahveh  pervert  Israel, 
rendering  them  cruel,  iniquitous,  bloodthirsty,  and 
treacherous  where  their  own  interests  were  concerned. 
Ezekiel  * asserts  that  Iahveh,  wishing  to  chastise  his 
people,  commanded  them  at  one  time  to  sacrifice  their 
children,  so  that  they  might  be  punished  with  their 
own  hands.  Assuredly  Iahveh,  at  this  remote  age, 
did  not  differ  very  much  from  Moloch.  The  good  of 
the  nation  whom  he  protected  was  the  supreme  good  ; 
all  the  rest  being  as  nothing  in  comparison.  The 
world  existed  for  Israel’s  sake.  Iahveh  was  a national, 
that  is  to  say  a very  malign  god. 

If  the  religion  of  Israel  had  not  gone  beyond  this 
phase,  it  is  assuredly  the  last  religion  to  which  the 
world  would  have  rallied.  It  might  as  well  have 
adopted  that  of  Camos.  Eut,  in  spite  of  appearances, 
eloliism  retained  its  inward  vitality,  and  was  to 
prevail  again,  until  Iahveh  had  lost  all  special  charac- 
teristics and  his  very  name  had  been  succeeded  by  an 
equivalent  of  Elohim,  the  harmless  Adona'i,  u the 
Lord.”  To  declare  that  a name  is  unpronounceable  is 
very  much  the  same  as  to  eliminate  this  name  alto- 
gether. As  a matter  of  fact,  the  usage  which  became 
prevalent  in  the  centuries  immediately  preceding  the 
Christian  era  marked  the  close  of  the  struggle 
between  Iahveh  and  Elohim,  or  rather  was  tantamount 
to  an  admission  that  Iahveh  no  longer  existed.  The 

* Ezekiel,  ck.  xx.,  v.  25  and  following. 


ISRAEL  IN  THE  DESERT  OF  PH  A RAN.  151 


Greek  and  Christian  translators  almost  ignore  the 
word  Iahveli.  K vpios,  the  equivalent  of  Adonai,  has 
more  or  less  supplanted  the  old  divine  proper  name. 
If  the  Alexandrian  translators  had  adopted  the  tran- 
scription Ieua?,  that  would  have  been  a tremendous 
obstacle  to  the  monotheistic  propaganda;  people  would 
have  said  that  this  was  another  Jupiter,  and  that  it 
was  not  worth  while  to  make  any  change. 

What  the  worship  of  a national  god  may  lead  to  is 
not  monotheism,  but  what  we  in  our  day  call  heno- 
theism.  The  national  god  is  a jealous  god,  and  will 
not  hear  of  any  rivalry,  so  that  it  becomes  necessary 
to  abandon  all  the  other  gods  for  him.  It  is  probable 
that  in  Daibon  or  Ar-Moab  Camos  was  as  exclusive 
as  Iahveh  became  in  Jerusalem,  and  that  a pious 
Moabite  supposed  him  to  be  as  susceptible  as  Iahveh 
was.  It  was  the  same  with  Melqarth  at  Tyr,  because 
the  name  of  the  u King  of  the  town  ” was  an  adapta- 
tion of  the  supreme  God  to  a national  past.*  The 
habit  of  repeating  upon  every  occasion,  u Our  God  is 
so  great  that  all  the  other  gods  are  nothing  by  com- 
parison with  Him,”  of  necessity  provoked  the  retort, 
“ Our  God  is  the  only  god  in  the  world.”  But  the 
intellect  of  peoples  is  so  sluggish  that  it  took  them 
centuries  to  draw  this  conclusion. 

The  man  who  is  in  distress  or  trouble  takes  a false 
view  in  religion ; for  he  must  needs  believe  that  a 

* For  the  analogies  between  the  worship  of  the  Tyrian  Melqarth 
and  that  of  the  Israelite  Jahveh,  see  Miss,  de  Then,  pp.  574, 
575. 


/5  2 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


God  cares  for  him  and  will  be  his  avenger.  He 
readily  becomes  superstitious.  Idolatry,  reduced 
during  the  ancient  patriarchal  period  to  the  minimum 
compatible  with  the  intellect  of  unlettered  people,  had 
acquired  a great  hold  upon  them  while  in  Egypt. 
The  people  clamoured  for  Mnevis  and  Hathor.*  It 
is  doubtful  whether  Mose  was  so  much  opposed  to 
this  idolatrous  worship  as  was  afterwards  asserted, 
for  we  find  that  a brazen  serpent  said  to  have  been  set 
up  by  him  was  in  existence  until  the  reign  of  Heze- 
kiah,  who  broke  it  in  pieces.  This  serpent,  which 
the  people  called  Nehustan , and  to  which  they 
offered  sacrifices, t was  probably  an  ancient  idol  of 
Iahveh.  The  serpent  was,  in  Egypt,  not  so  much  a 
god  of  itself,  as  a manner  of  representing  the  gods 
and  goddesses.  One  of  the  points  which  constituted 
the  great  inferiority  of  Iahveh  was  this  degrading 
promiscuity  with  the  gods  of  low  degree.  There  was 
never  any  image  of  Sadda’i,  Elion,  or  Elohim.  There 
were  images  of  Iahveh. 

At  a later  date  it  was  asserted  that  Moses  had  lifted 
up  and  placed  upon  a pole,  as  a talisman  against  the 
bite  of  the  serpents,  this  mysterious  Nchustan.%  Both 
versions  may  be  true,  for  it  is  not  at  all  impossible 
that  Moses  may  have  been,  in  some  ways,  one  of  those 
sorcerers  whom  Egypt  possessed,  or  who  eame  from  the 

* It  is  remarkable  that  Hatkor  holds  a very  important  place  in 
the  Egyptian  inscriptions  of  the  peninsula  of  Sinai.  ( Ordnance 
Survey,  part  i.,  pp.  168  and  following.) 

t Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  4. 

J Numbers,  ch.  xxi.,  v 4 — 9. 


ISRAEL  IN  THE  DESERT  OF  PH  ARAN.  153 


banks  of  the  Euphrates.*  No  alterations  are  too 
great  to  have  taken  place  after  the  lapse  of  five  or  six 
centuries,  when  a religious  genius  as  powerful  as  that 
of  the  Hebrews  is  working  upon  an  oral  tradition 
which  is  above  all  things  non-resistent  and  suscep- 
tible of  any  degree  of  transformation. 

The  aron , or  ark,  in  the  course  of  these  peregrinations, 
became  more  and  more  the  central  piece  of  the  tribes. 
The  bearers  of  the  wooden  staves  which  acted  as  handles 
were  probably  Levites.  They  were  highly  esteemed,  and 
were  in  a measure  the  guides  and  the  leaders  of  the 
nation.  They  were  called  Beni- Aron  or  Ahron,j*  so, 
in  accordance  with  the  custom  of  genealogies,  Aron,  or 
Ahron,  became  a personage,  a guide  of  the  people  like 
Moses,  and  in  time  the  latter’s  brother.  This  is  how 
many  savants  explain  Aaron’s  being  made  the  head  of 
the  priesthood  and  the  supposed  leader  of  the  so-called 
tribe  of  Levi.  I give  their  opinion  just  to  show  how, 
in  difficult  matters  of  this  kind,  views  may  differ, 
without  on  that  account  exceeding  the  bounds  of 
possibility. 

TJpon  reaching  the  first  slopes  of  Sinai,  the  Israelites 
ceased  to  follow  the  sea.  Yeering  to  the  east,  they 
marched  round  the  base  of  the  mountain  and  struck 
inland  as  far  as  the  place  called  Eephidim.J  It  is 
almost  the  only  spot  in  the  peninsula  where  nature 

* Balaam. 

t pn«  for  pH  would  be  an  ancient  way  of  spelling,  fpliT, 

n *nn\  siznn\ 

+ Now  called  Feiran.  It  is  the  <t>a pay  of  the  ancients. 


i54  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


deigns  to  smile.*  There  are  a few  palm-trees  and  a 
little  water,  but  the  name  of  these  pools  is  charac- 
teristic, for  they  were  called  the  waters  of  J\leriba , 
that  is  “ of  strife,”  on  account  of  the  incessant  fights 
which  took  place  there  between  the  Bedouins  when 
they  came  to  let  their  flocks  drink  of  them. 

It  was,  too,  at  this  spot  that  the  Israelites  appear  to 
have  had  to  fight  their  first  battle  with  the  hordes 
who  were  seeking,  like  them,  to  eke  out  a bare  exist- 
ence in  these  regions.  The  Amalekites,  closely  related 
to  the  Edomites,  and  consequently  very  nearly  con- 
nected with  the  Jacobite  group,  fell  upon  them  while 
they  were  at  rest  under  the  palm-trees  of  the  oasis. 
The  Israelites  got  the  upper  hand,  and  this  fact, 
followed  no  doubt  by  many  others  of  a like  kind,*j* 
was  the  origin  of  a terrible  feud  between  Israel  and 
Amalek.  Israel  swore  that  they  would  not  cease  their 
warfare  against  the  Amalekites  until  they  had  exter- 
minated them,J  and  they  kept  their  word. 

With  the  battle  of  Repliidim  commence,  in  all 
probability,  the  borrowings  of  the  compilers  of  Sacred 
History  from  the  ancient  book  of  the  Wars  of  Iahv eh. § 

* Rephidim  means  the  “ place  of  repose.”  The  site  of  the  con- 
vent of  St.  Catherine  is  much  better,  but  the  Israelites  do  not 
appear  to  have  gone  in  this  direction. 

t The  J ehovist  narrator  seems  to  have  magnified  into  a miracu- 
lous victory  several  stories  of  skirmishes  and  captures  of  fugitives. 
(Deuteronomy,  ch.  xxv.,  v.  17  and  following;  First  Book  of 
Samuel,  ch.  xv.,  v.  2.) 

J Exodus,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  8 — 16. 

§ I shall  endeavour  to  show,  in  vol.  ii.,  that  the  first  com- 
pilation of  a Sacred  History,  constituting  the  framework  of  the 


ISRAEL  IN  THE  DESERT  OF  PHARAN. 


1 5 5 


At  this  battle  there  appears  for  the  first  time  a com- 
panion of  Mosd,  upon  whom  devolved  more  especially 
the  military  part.  This  was  Hosea  or  Iosua  (the  con- 
queror), known  under  the  name  of  Joshua.  The  bias  of 
the  pious  compilers  is  so  visible  in  all  these  narratives 
that  the  name  of  Joshua,  like  that  of  Moses,  can  only  be 
used  in  a historical  narrative  with  the  utmost  precau- 
tion.* Caleb,  j*  one  of  the  most  highly  extolled  heroes 
of  the  hook  of  the  Wars  of  Iahveh , may  have  only 
existed  in  the  imagination  of  the  collectors  of  popular 
songs  who  were  responsible  for  the  epic  souvenirs  of 
the  nation.  It  was  the  same  with  Hur,  whose  name 
appears  originally  to  have  designated  a sub-tribe  in  the 
south  of  Judah,  in  relation  with  the  Calebites.J 

The  sojourn  at  Eephidim  may  have  lasted  some 
time.  Three  months  had  elapsed  since  the  coming 

present  Hexateuch,  took  place  about  800  b.c.,  but  that  tbis  com 
pilation  was  made  from  still  earlier  books,  the  Iasar,  the  book  of 
the  Wars  of  Iahveh,  the  book  of  the  patriarchal  legends,  which  may 
be  assigned  the  approximate  date  of  900  b.c. 

* By  reasoning  of  this  kind,  it  is  urged,  it  would  be  possible  to 
prove  that  Napoleon  never  existed.  The  two  things  do  not  run  on 
parallel  lines.  The  first  sources  of  the  history  of  Moses  and 
Joshua  are  nearly  500  years  posterior  to  Moses  and  Joshua. 
Handwriting  was  not  known  in  Israel  until  three  or  four  hundred 
years  after  the  time  of  Moses  and  Joshua.  The  ages  which  do  not 
possess  handwriting  transmit  only  fables. 

f This  name  is  more  Canaanite  than  Hebrew.  Corpus  inscr. 
semit.,  part  i.,Nos.  29,  52.  See  above,  pp.  89,  90,  and  below,  pp. 
205,  206. 

1 Exodus,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  10  ; ch.  xxiv.,  v.  14  ; First  Book  oi 
Chronicles,  ch.  ii.,  v.  19  and  following,  50  and  following  ; ch.  iv., 
v.  1,  4. 

N 


1 56  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


out  of  Egypt,*  when  the  Beni-Israel  raised  their  camp 
and  penetrated  into  the  rocky  gorges  which  lead  to  the 
"Wadi,  and  which  were  designated  by  the  generic  name 
of  Horeb.f  This  was  what  was  called  u the  desert  of 
Sinai,”  an  austere  and  imposing  region,  for  which  the 
genius  of  Israel  was  to  secure  the  first  rank  among 
the  holy  places  of  humanity. 

* Exodus,  ch.  xix.,  v.  1. 

t Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  1. ; ch.  xvii.,  v.  6;  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  6. 


CHAPTER  XIY 


SINAI. 

The  mountain  of  Sinai,  formed  of  dark  granite,  which 
the  sun,  gilding  every  object  upon  which  it  shines, 
has  bathed  for  centuries  without  penetrating,  is  one  of 
the  most  singular  phenomena  on  the  surface  of  the 
globe.*  It  is  the  exact  likeness  of  those  landscapes  of  a 
world  without  water,  such  as  one  imagines  the  moon,  or 
any  other  celestial  body  devoid  of  atmosphere,  to  be.  It 
is  not  that  frequent  and  terrible  storms  do  not  gather 
round  its  summit.  But  the  storm,  in  other  places 
beneficent,  is  here  merely  terrible,  a kind  of  inorganic 
phenomenon,  in  a manner  metallic,  a concert  entirely 
composed  of  the  sound  of  the  cannon,  the  drum,  the 
trumpet,  and  the  bell.  Its  summits  must  be  inhabited 
by  severe  gods  ; it  is  Olympus  without  its  waters  and 
forests,  Iceland  or  Jan  Mayen  without  snow.  Of  all  that 
constitutes  nature — sun,  clouds,  water,  trees,  verdure, 
man,  beast — there  is  nothing  here  but  stone,  seamed 
by  lodes  of  metal,  sometimes  condensed  into  spark- 
ling gems,  always  resisting  life  and  stifling  it  all 
around.  Copper,  turquoises,  all  the  residues  of  a kind 
of  natural  vitrifaction,  these  are  the  products  of  Sinai. 

* Ordnance  Survey,  part  i.,  p.  28. 

N 2 


r 5 8 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


The  Thora,  also,  is  said  to  have  come  from  there,  but 
never  life.  If  one  excepts  the  little  oasis  of  the  con- 
vent of  St.  Catherine,-  placed  beyond  the  parts  seen  by 
the  Hebrews,  the  barrenness  is  absolute ; this  unnatural 
country  yields  neither  fruit,  nor  corn,  nor  a drop  of 
water.  On  the  other  hand,  nowhere  is  the  light  so  in- 
tense, the  air  so  transparent,  the  snow  so  dazzling. 
The  silence  of  these  solitudes  is  appalling ; a whisper 
awakens  curious  echoes,  the  traveller  is  alarmed  by  the 
sound  of  his  own  footsteps.*  It  is  indeed  the  moun- 
tain of  the  Elohim,*j*  with  their  indistinct  outlines,  their 
deceptive  transparencies,  their  strange  reflections. 

Sinai  is,  in  a way,  the  mountain  of  Egypt.  Egypt 
properly  speaking  has  no  mountains.  J What  are 
called  the  Arabian  or  Libyan  chains  are  merely  moun- 
tains in  appearance  ; their  uniform  heights  have  no 
reverse ; they  are  banks  formed  by  the  hollow  of  an 
enormous  valley.  The  shores  of  the  Eed  Sea,  which 
runs  like  a canal  through  the  desert,  resemble  each 
other.  Sinai  is  therefore  throughout  the  region  of 
Sahara  an  unique  object,  an  isolated  accident,  a throne, 
a pedestal  for  something  divine.  Egypt,  shut  up  in 
its  valley  and  caring  nothing  for  the  aspect  of  the 
country,  paid  little  attention  to  it ; but  it  was  other- 
wise with  the  nomad  tribes  in  the  neighbourhood. 
Horeb,  or  Sinai,  from  the  most  remote  antiquity, 
was  the  object  of  religious  worship  on  the  part 

* Ordnance  Survey,  part  i.,  p.  30. 

1 D'nbsn  in-  Exodus,  cb.  iii.,  v.  1. 

t One  must  except  the  Djebel-Ataka  and  its  chain,  running  to 
the  monastery  of  St.  Paul,  forming,  as  it  were,  small  Sinais. 


SINAI. 


iS9 


of  tlie  people  of  Ilebrew  or  of  Arab  origin  wbo  roamed 
about  those  parts.*  They  made  pilgrimages  there.  | 
The  Semites  of  Egypt  went  there  frequently  to  otfer 
up  sacrifices. £ They  believed  that  their  god  resided 
there.  The  holy  mountain  spread  terror  a long  way 
around  it.  It  was  called  par  excellence  “the  moun- 
tain of  Eloliim,”  or  “ the  mountain  of  God.”§  It  was 
admitted  that  the  Eloliim  resided  on  its  summits, J| 
snowy  or  shining,  limpid  as  crystal  or  gloomy  and 
enveloped  with  a terrible  covering  of  mist.  Up  to 
the  first  centuries  of  our  era  the  tribes  from  the 
north  of  Arabia  made  pilgrimages  to  Feiran  and 
Serbal.  The  names  of  the  pilgrims  written  in  hun- 
dreds on  the  rocks  of  the  valley  leading  there,  bear 
witness  to  the  persistency  with  which  the  worship 
attached  to  these  rocks  was  carried  on  for  centuries.  * * §] 
The  worship  of  mountains  is  one  of  the  most  ancient 
among  the  Semitic  races.**  Tabor,  Casius,  Horan, 
Hermon,  and  Lebanon  had  their  worship  and  their 

* Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  1 and  following. 

+ Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  18. 

\ Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  18. 

§ Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  1 ; ch.  iv.,  v.  27;  ch.  xviii.,  v.  5;  ch. 
xxiv.,  v.  13  ; First  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xix.,  v.  8 ; Numbers,  ch.  x., 
v.  38;  Psalm  xxxvi.,  v.  7 ; lviii. , v.  16  and  following. 

||  Note  expression  bs  nb37  7112772-  Exodus,  ch.  xix.,  v. 

3,  “ Moses  went  up  into  the  Elohirn .” 

11  Inscriptions  called  Sinaitic.  See  the  dissertation  of  Tuch,  in 
the  Zeitschrift  der  d.  m.  G.,  1849,  pp,  129  and  following;  that 
of  Levy  of  Breslau,  same  collection,  I860,  pp.  363  and  following, 
694  and  following  There  are  among  the  pilgrims  Christians,  Jews, 
and  pagans.  Journal  asiat.,  January,  February,  and  March,  1859. 

**  Baudissin,  Studien  zum  semit.  Eel.,  ii.,  pp.  232  and  following. 


1 60  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


god.'"'  Sinai  had  its  god,  who  had  the  greatest  pos- 
sible affinity  with  lightning.  The  summits  where  such 
terrible  storms  were  brewed  appeared  to  be  the  dwell- 
ing-place of  a fiery  deity  with  the  pinions  of  an  eagle 
or  a hawk, "l*  riding  on  the  wings  of  the  wind,  with 
angels  for  messengers  and  his  ministers  a flaming  fire.  J 
The  Arafel,  the  dark  cloud,  was  his  veil.  He  rent  it 
to  show  himself  in  lightning.  A god  of  flame  resided 
there.  What  is  very  striking  is  that  in  the  five  or 
six  really  ancient  paragraphs  which  we  have  con- 
cerning the  life  of  Moses,  the  future  chief  of  Israel, 
exiled  among  the  Midianites  and  keeping  the  sheep  of 
his  father-in-law  Jethro,  he  visits  “Horeb,  the  moun- 
tain of  God,”  and  sees  there  the  vision  of  a hush 
which  burns  without  being  consumed.  § 

The  god  of  Sinai  was,  at  all  events,  redoubtable, 
and  was  not  to  be  disturbed  with  impunity  in  his 
retreat.  When  you  met  him  in  the  gorges  of  his 
mountain  he  endeavoured  to  kill  you.  Such  appears 
at  least  to  be  the  explanation  of  the  following  curious 
episode.  We  must  be  satisfied  with  translating  it, 
for  we  cannot  fathom  its  real  meaning.  “And  it 

* Baal-Hermon,  Baal  Lebanon,  Baal-Horan,  Deus  Carmelus,  the 
name  of  Cassioclore.  See  Corpus  inscr.  sernit.,  part  i.,  p.  26. 

f Exodus,  ch.  xix.,  v.  14.  See  the  curious  coin  in  the  British 
Museum,  a little  anterior  to  Alexander,  representing  a god  of  light- 
ning on  a kind  of  winged  velocipede,  with  the  legend  *jrP  ; Be 
Luynes,  Numism.  des  satrapies,  pi.  iv.,  No.  4;  Combe,  Vet.  Numi, 
in  British  Museum,  pi.  xiii.,  No.  12;  Six,  in  Numism.  Chronicle , 
1877,  p.  229.  It  is  not  impossible  that  a satrap  of  the  Jewish  or 
Samaritan  countries  put  the  god  of  the  country  on  these  coins. 

| Psalm  civ.,  v.  4. 

§ Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  1 and  following. 


SINAI. 


1 6 1 


‘came  to  pass  by  the  way  in  the  inn,  that  Iahveh  met 
him  and  sought  to  kill  him.  Then  Zippora*  took  a 
sharp  stone  and  cut  off  the  foreskin  of  her  son,  and 
cast  it  at  his  feet,  and  said,  Surely  a bloody  husband 
art  thou  to  me.  Then  Iahveh  let  Moses  go.”*j*  This 
appears  to  me  the  counterpart  of  the  struggle  between 
Jacob  and  an  angel.  When  a person  passed  through 
the  territory  of  a god  it  was  not  rare  for  the  god  to 
attack  him  in  the  dark,  and  he  did  not  escape  with- 
out being  emasculated,  unnerved,  or  undergoing  some 
sanguinary  expiation. 

Sinai  was  therefore  above  all  a mountain  of  terror. 
Certain  spots  were  considered  holy,  and  one  could  not 
walk  on  them  without  taking  off  one’s  shoes.  £ The 
general  belief  was  that  one  could  not  see  the  god  and 
live.§  Even  his  presence  killed.  ||  The  common 
people  could  not  approach  him.^[  Ilis  face,  a kind  of 
distinct  hypostasis  of  himself,**  was  the  head  of  Me- 
dusa which  no  living  person  could  see.f  f Even  those 

* The  wife  of  Moses. 

t Exodus,  ch.  iv.,  v.  24 — 26. 

J Exodus,  ch.  iii. , v.  5. 

§ Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  6. 

||  Exodus,  ch.  xix.,  v.  12  and  following,  21  ; ch.  xx.,  v.  18  and 
following  ; ch.  xxviii.,  v.  35  ; ch.  xxx.,  v.  21  ; ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  20; 
Leviticus,  ch.  xvi.,  v.  13.  Exception:  Exodus,  ch.  xxiv.,  v.  9 — 
11,  which  confirms  rule.  Note  Genesis,  ch.  xvi.,  v.  13. 

11  Exodus,  ch.  xxiv.,  v.  2 

Exodus,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  14.  Compare  the  ©eoD  ttpoctwttov  with 
the  of  the  Phoenicians.  Concerning  Maleak  Iahveh  see 

further  on,  p.  234. 

tt  Legend  of  Elijah,  First  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xix.,  v.  13; 
Isaiah,  ch.  vi.,  v.  2. 


1 62  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


who  enjoyed  the  honour  of  conversing  with  him  face  to 
face  expiated  that  honour  by  death.  It  was  related  that 
one  day,  in  Uoreb,  Moses  wished  to  see  the  glory  of 
this  terrible  god.  The  god  took  him,  placed  him  in  the 
cleft  of  a rock,  made  him  stand  up,  covered  him  with 
his  large  open  hand,  and  passed  by.  Then  he  with- 
drew his  hand  so  that  Moses  saw  him  from  behind.  If 
Moses  had  seen  his  face  he  would  have  died.*  Elijah 
afterwards  saw  the  god  of  Horeb  under  similar  cir- 
cumstances.j*  To  catch  a stealthy  glimpse  of  this 
hidden  god,  was  the  supreme  privilege  of  the  elect. 
Other  visions,  such  as  the  dazzling  nature  of  the  sky,J 
confirmed  the  impressions  held  with  regard  to  the 
top  of  the  mountain.  It  was  related  that  one  day  the 
elders  of  Israel  ascended  the  mountain  and  saw  the 
divinity  of  the  place,  “and  there  was  under  his  feet  as 
it  were  a paved  work  of  sapphire  stone,  and  as  it 
were  the  splendour  of  heaven  itself.” 

The  god  of  Sinai,  it  will  be  seen,  was  a god  of  light- 
ning. His  theophanies  took  place  in  the  storm,  in  the 
midst  of  the  flashing  of  lightning.  § The  ancient  Iahveh 
had  already  perhaps  possessed  some  of  these  charac- 
teristics. Iahveh  besides  was  decidedly  beginning 
to  play  the  part  of  the  tutelary  god  of  Israel,  and  was 
replacing  the  old  elohim  in  the  imagination  of  the 
people.  ||  It  was  therefore  only  natural  that  they 

* Exodus,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  17 — 23  (very  old), 
f First  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xix. 

J Exodus,  ch.  xxiv.,  v.  1,  2,  9 — 11. 

§ Exodus,  ch.  xix. ; Job,  ch.  xxxviii.,  v.  1. 

||  The  fact  of  Sinai  being  called  the  “ Mountain  of  Iahveh  " 


SINAI. 


163 

should  identify  Iahveh  with  the  God  through  whose 
lands  they  were  passing  and  whose  terrible  influence 
they  thought  that  they  felt.*  Egypt  carried  the 
belief  in  local  divinities  to  the  uttermost  limit ; each 
district  had  its  special  god.  Sinai  was  henceforward 
the  basis  of  all  the  theology  of  the  Israelites,  and  it 
was  obstinately  declared  that  Iahveh  appeared  there 
for  the  first  time  under  the  form  of  fire.t 

What  really  happened  when,  from  the  camp  of 
Kephidim,  the  tribe  entered  the  rocky  defiles  of  the 
Horeb  ? J Impossible  to  say.  Did  there  take  place, 
in  fact,  opposite  to  Serbal,  a religious  act,  a sort  of 
consecration  of  the  people  to  the  god  of  the  mountain, 

does  not  authorise  the  conclusion  that  Iahveh  was  primitively  the 
name  of  the  -god  of  the  mountain. 

* Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  14  ; ch.  vi.,  v.  3. 

t Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  1 and  following. 

I The  critic  who  holds  that  all  the  stories  relative  to  Horeb  and 
Sinai  are  legends,  can  hardly  attach  any  value  to  the  topographical 
researches  which  have  been  made  in  order  to  localise  the  Biblical 
mise  en  scene.  The  author,  writing  in  Palestine,  did  not  have  in  view 
this  or  that  site  in  preference  to  another.  It  is,  however,  far  more 
natural  to  connect  the  Biblical  traditions  with  Serbal,  beyond  Feiran, 
than  with  Djebel  Mousa  or  Djebel  Katherin.  This  latter  region  is 
in  fact  fertile,  well  watered,  and  in  no  way  deserves  the  name 
of  the  “ desert  of  Sinai,”  by  which  the  place  of  the  theophanie  is 
designated.  Let  me  add  that  Horeb  and  Sinai  were  considered 
synonymous  ; now  Horeb  certainly  meant  the  mountainous  region 
which  overlooked  Rephidim.  Exodus,  ch.  iii.,  v.  1 ; ch.  xvii., 
v.  6. 

The  inscriptions  of  Wadi  Mokatteb  are  also  a serious  indication. 
They  show  that  the  immemorial  pilgrimage  was  made  to  Feiran  and 
to  the  heights  which  overlook  it.  Feiran  (Rephidim)  is,  if  one 
can  so  express  oneself,  the  religious  and  historical  centre  of 
Sinai. 


1 6+  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


so  that  from  that  clay  forward  the  god  of  Sinai  was 
the  special  god  of  Israel?  Did  Moses,  the  chief  of 
the  people,  take  advantage  of  one  of  those  fearful 
storms  so  frequent  in  the  country  to  make  the  people 
believe  in  a revelation  of  the  “ god-lightning  ” who 
resided  on  the  heights  ? The  manner  in  which  the 
Law  was  connected  with  Sinai,  towards  the  nineteenth 
century  b.c.,  had  it  any  foundation  in  fact  ? Or,  in 
the  four  or  five  hundred  years  which  followed  this 
grandiose  legend,  did  it  swell  like  a soap  bubble,  all 
the  more  brilliant  and  coloured  because  it  was  empty  ? 

Two  things  only  can  be  perceived.  The  first  is 
that  from  the  commencement  of  the  Sinaitic  epoch  it 
became  the  custom  to  regard  Iahveli  as  appearing  in 
the  form  of  a vision  of  flame*  For  clothing  he  had  a 
thick  cloud,  for  voice  the  thunder.  In  the  storm  he 
rode  upon  the  wind  and  made  the  clouds  his  chariot.^ 
Sometimes  he  is  represented  in  an  automatic  car 
furnished  with  wings. J A second  well-ascertained 
fact,  not  less  remarkable,  is  that  the  Iahveh  of  the 
Hebrews,  when  definitely  constituted,  lived  in  Sinai,  § 
as  Jupiter  and  the  Grecian  gods  lived  in  Olympus. 
His  dwelling  was  on  the  mountain  top,  especially 
when  the  summit  was  hidden  from  sight  by  heavy 

* Genesis,  ck.  xv.,  v.  17  ; Exodus,  cb.  iii.,  v.  2 ; ch.  xix., 
v.  18;  cb.  xxiv.,  v.  17;  First  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xix.,  v.  12; 
Ezekiel,  cb.  i.,  v.  27  ; cb.  viii. , v.  2.  I am  led  to  believe  that  in 
Deuteronomy,  cb.  xxxiii.,  v.  16  (Blessing  of  Moses),  one  must  read 
vpD  133IZ7. 

f Psalm  xviii.,  v.  11  ; civ.,  v.  8,  4. 

J Coin  in  British  Museum  (see  p.  160). 

8 Exodus  cb.  xix.,  3,  4 ; cb.  xxxiii.,  v.  21. 


SINAI. 


i&5 

clouds.  From  thence  he  hurst  forth  with  horrible 
sounds,  lightning,  flames  of  fire,  and  thunder.  The 
fundamental  image  of  the  Hebrew  religion  and  poetry 
is  the  tlieophani / of  Iahveh  appearing  like  an  aurora 
borealis  to  judge  the  world.* * * §  This  apparition  always 
came  from  the  south,  higher  up  than  Paran  and  Seir, 
starting  from  Sinai.  Thus  in  the  most  ancient  piece 
of  Hebrew  poetry  which  we  possess  in  a complete 
form — j* 

0 Iahveh,  when  thou  wentest  out  of  Seii’, 

When  thou  marchest  out  of  the  field  of  Edom, 

The  earth  trembled,  and  the  heavens  dropped, 

The  clouds  also  dropped  water  ; 

That  Sinai ! ....  at  the  sight  of  Iahveh  ; 

At  the  sight  of  Iahveh,  the  God  of  Israel. 

And  in  another  very  old  piece  artificially  inserted  to 
form  the  u Plessing  of  Moses  ” — J 

Iahveh  came  from  Sinai, 

And  rose  up  from  Seir  against  them ; 

He  shined  forth  from  Mount  Paran ; 

He  comes  from  Meriboth-Kadesh,§ 

From  the  south  side,  the  fire  shines.|| 


* See  descriptions  of  day  of  Iahveh  in  all  the  prophets,  beginning 
with  Amos,  and  those  of  the  apparition  of  the  Messiah  (the 
parousie ) in  the  synoptic  Gospels. 

f The  Song  of  Deborah,  Judges,  ch.  v.  Remark  that  these 
verses,  like  those  which  follow,  are  anterior  to  the  accounts  con- 
tained in  Exodus. 

J Deuteronomy,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  2. 

§ Deuteronomy,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  2 ; one  must  surely  read  tiHpT 
or  “QTEE.  Compare  Ezekiel,  ch.  xlvii.,  v.  19. 
See  Gesen.,  Thes.,  at  words  rQ'HID  and  t£Hp.  The  Greek  trans- 
lator has  read,  like  us,  KaSiJs.  Compare  Psalm  xxix.,  v.  8.  The 
meriha  or  meriboth  of  Kadesh  was  a well-known  spring. 

||  Passage  altered  by  copyist.  I suppose  one  should  read 


1 66  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


And  in  the  original  portions  of  the  Psalm  “ Let  God 
arise  ” — * 

0 God,  when  thou  wentest  forth  before  thy  people, 

When  thou  didst  march  through  the  wilderness, 

The  earth  shook,  the  heavens  also  dropped, 

At  the  presence  of  God 

Even  Sinai ! . . . . 

At  the  presence  of  God,  the  God  of  Israel; 

and  in  the  Psalm  of  Habakkuk — • 

God  came  from  Teman, 

The  Holy  One  came  from  Mount  Paran.f 

Sinai  became  therefore  the  Olympus  of  Israel,  the 
place  from  whence  all  the  luminous  apparitions  of 
Iahveh  issued.  It  was  only  natural  that  when 
they  desired  a Thora  from  Iahveh  that  they  made 
him  reveal  it  on  Mount  Sinai  or  Mount  Horeb.  At 
this  remote  epoch,  that  is  to  say  when  Israel  went  up 
to  the  mountain  of  God,  did  the  people  think  that  they 
heard  some  lesson  ? Lid  Moses  take  advantage  of  the 
circumstance  to  inculcate  certain  precepts  ? The  little 
influence  exercised  by  those  precepts  in  the  daily  life  of 
Israel,  during  the  six  or  seven  hundred  years  which 
followed,  favours  the  belief  that  they  never  existed. 
It  appears  probable  at  least  that  the  people  left  the 
holy  mountain  filled  with  terror  and  persuaded  that 
a powerful  god  inhabited  its  peaks.  There  were  no 

“ On  the  south  side.”  Compare  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxiii., 
v.  19.  Perhaps  the  real  text  of  our  passage  is  pia'O. 

* Psalm  Ixviii.,  v.  8,  9.  At  verse  18  read  S3  '3“TN- 
t Habakkuk,  ch.  iii.,  v.  3;  Psalm  lxxvii.,  v.  17,  &c.,  passage 
which  appears  imitated  from  Habakkuk. 


SINAI. 


if; 

doubt  sacrifices  offered  and  altars  erected.*  There 
was,  above  all,  a startling  recollection.  The  people  had 
really  seen  the  god  of  the  holy  mountain.  This  vision, 
like  a flash  of  lightning,  had  blinded  them.  Deep  in 
their  inflamed  retinas  there  remained  a kind  of  aurora 
borealis  whose  vision  they  could  not  shake  off.  Not 
one  of  the  old  Hebrew  poems  but  commenced  with 
this  persistent  impression.  The  chief  image  which 
dominated  the  religious  feeling  of  Israel  was  the 
apparition  of  Sinai. 

Primitive  man  has  always  lodged  his  gods  in  the 
mountains  of  eternal  snow.  Those  untrodden  heights 
left  a great  latitude  for  mystery.  People  could  well 
imagine  that  the  muses  (kind  of  fairies)  inhabited 
Parnassus,  that  Jupiter  held  his  court  upon  Olympus, 
before  the  summits  of  those  mountains  had  been  ex- 
plored, f Put  directly  the  ascent  was  made  it  was 
clearly  seen  that  the  immortals  were  not  there. 

Iahveh,  like  the  other  gods,  lived  in  the  highest 
mountain  of  the  region  consecrated  to  his  worship. 
Sinai  was  marvellously  adapted  to  play  the  part  of  a 
divine  mountain  for  the  tribes  roaming  to  the  east  of 
Egypt,  in  the  north  of  Arabia,  and  in  the  south  of 
Palestine.  In  middle  Palestine  the  volcanic  moun- 
tains of  Horan,  whose  appearance  is  so  striking,  might 
have  been  selected.  In  fact  the  poet  supposes  the 

* Exodus,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  15,  16. 

t The  people  of  antiquity  and  of  the  Middle  Ages  had  not  the 
same  taste  for  ascending  mountains  as  people  of  modern  times. 
The  first  ascent  of  Mont  Blanc  took  place  in  1788. 


1 68  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


mountains  of  Horan  to  have  been  jealous  of  the  prefer- 
ence shown  by  Iahveh  for  the  little  hill  of  Sion.*  In 
the  north  part  of  Palestine  it  was  certainly  Hermon 
which  would  have  been  chosen.  That  superb  isolated 
cone,  always  streaked  with  snow,  the  highest  in  Syria, 
seemed  expressly  made  for  the  residence  of  the  god  of  the 
region.  The  fact  that  the  god  of  Israel  had  his  dwell- 
ing in  Sinai,  a mountain  so  far  from  the  ken  of  Pales- 
tine, is  the  best  proof  of  the  religious  importance 
which  the  children  of  Israel  attached  to  that  moun- 
tain. For  the  seers  and  the  poets  the  aurora  of  the 
divine  apparition  came  always  from  u the  south.”  If 
Iahveh  was  not,  as  may  be  supposed,  the  special  god 
of  Sinai,  it  is  at  all  events  at  Sinai  that  must  be  placed 
the  intermediary  station  where  he  became  the  special 
god  of  Israel.  This  was  a terrible  fall ; the  old  aeon 
of  the  Chaldeans,  the  master  of  life,  descended  to  the 
inferior  part  of  protector  of  a little  nation.  But  this 
nation  was  Israel,  and  what  Israel  adopted  had  the  good 
fortune  of  being  adopted  by  humanity.  In  this  sense 
Iahveh  really  appeared  in  Sinai,  and  the  ancient 
Hebrew  poet  was  right  in  saying — 

Iahveh  came  from  Sinai, 

He  rose  up  from  Seir, 

He  shined  forth  from  Mount  Paran.f 

The  adoption  of  Iahveh  which  appears  to  have  been 
consummated  at  the  Sinaitic  epoch,  J was  it  regarded 

* Psalm  lxviii.,  v.  16. 

t Deuteronomy,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  2. 

\ The  Jehovist  account  of  the  battle  of  Rephidim  (Exodus, 


SINAI. 


169 


as  a conversion,  as  something  as  marked  as  were  after- 
wards the  construction  of  the  temple,  the  reform  of 
Hezekiah,  and  especially  the  fanatical  organisation  of 
Josiah?  This  must  be  accepted  with  great  caution. 
One  of  the  signs  of  the  complete  nationalisation  of  a god 
is  the  introduction  of  his  name  into  the  proper  names 
of  men.  Now  the  name  of  Iahveh,  either  as  initial 
component  ( Ieho  or  Io)  or  as  final  component  (Iah), 
seldom  appears  in  proper  names  before  the  day  of 
Samuel  and  of  Saul.*  More  than  that : a great  number 
of  Israelites  at  the  time  of  the  Judges  and  of  David 
bore  names  into  which  entered  the  component  Baal,j* 
such  as  Jarebaal,  Meribaal,  Ishbaal,  Baaliada.  ^ This 
name  of  Baal,  the  equivalent  of  Adonai,  but  in  great 
favour  among  the  Phoenicians,  was  not  considered 
improper  or  idolatrous  until  the  days  of  the  prophets 
of  the  school  of  Elijah.  Up  to  that  time  a broad 


ch.  xvii.,  v.  15,  16),  seems  to  have  been  borrowed  lrora  the  Wars 
of  Iahveli , which,  written  in  the  ninth  or  tenth  century,  may  have 
exaggerated  the  Jehovist  character  of  those  accounts. 

* Apparent  exception  : Jokebed,  mother  of  Moses  (name  no 
doubt  fabricated  afterwards ; the  name  of  Iahveh  is  not  found  in 
the  name  of  any  woman  of  really  ancient  times  ; Athalia  is  a 
feminine  adjective).  It  is  not  at  all  sure  that  the  name  of  Joshua 
includes  the  name  of  Iahveh,  and  then  the  personage  is  quite 
legendary.  Joel  and  Abiah,  names  of  the  sons  of  Samuel,  are 
doubtful.  As  regards  Joas  and  Jotham,  father  and  son  of  Gideon, 
see  below  (p.  260).  With  regard  to  Micah  or  Michaihon,  see  below 
(p.  285). 

t Afterwards  boset  (shame)  was  substituted  for  baal,  or  else  El 
was  put  in  the  place  of  Baal.  A great  number  of  pagan  names 
have  been  thus  obliterated. 

J Other  examples:  Gesenius,  Thes.,  pp.,  229,  230. 


170  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

eclecticism  had  been  the  religious  rule  of  Israel.  It  is 
, remarkable  that  the  names  formed  of  the  components 
MiliJc  or  Baal  are  to  he  found  particularly  in  the 
families  of  Gideon,  of  Saul,  and  of  David,*  or  among 
their  followers. 


* Gesenius,  already  quoted. 


CHAPTER  XV. 


JOURNEYING  TOWARDS  CANAAN. 

It  is  strange  that  once  among  the  mountains  of  Sinai, 
in  the  direction  of  the  Serbal  of  to-day,  the  children 
of  Israel  did  not  push  on  a little  to  the  south-west. 
There  they  would  have  found  higher  peaks  than  those  of 
Serbal,  and,  in  the  valley  between  those  lofty  summits, 
an  oasis  which  would  certainly  have  appeared  to  them 
like  the  Paradise  of  God  ; we  mean  the  upper  valley 
in  which  is  now  situated  the  convent  of  St.  Catherine. 
It  is  probable  that  this  lovely  spot  was  occupied  by  a 
stronger  tribe ; for,  after  a visit  to  the  “ desert  of 
Sinai,”  the  people  of  Israel  returned  to  the  “ desert  of 
Paran,”  * and,  after  twenty  days’  journey,  arrived  at 
the  extremity  of  the  Elanitic  gulf,  at  Asion-Gaber. 
This  was  a Midianite  emporium. j*  Tearing  to  sojourn 
in  towns,  like  all  nomad  tribes,  the  Eeni-Israel 
avoided  entering  that  place. 

The  route  of  Israel  appears  to  have  been  up  to 
that  time  very  uncertain.  It  is  probable  that  if  the 
fugitives  had  encountered  some  fruitful  land  on  their 
way  they  would  have  halted.  On  arriving  at  Asion- 

* Numbers,  ck.  xii.,  v.  16. 
t Deuteronomy,  ck.  ii.,  v.  8. 

0 


172  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


Gaber  they  had  Arabia  before  them,  a not  very 
enviable  land,  peopled  besides,  as  far  as  it  could  be,  by 
Ishmaelites  and  Ketureans.  It  is  probable  that  the 
idea  occurred  to-  them  at  this  moment  of  returning 
to  Canaan,  the  dwelling  place  of  their  ancestors,  no 
longer  as  foreigners  who  were  tolerated,  but  as  lawful 
owners.  Gratitude  is  not  a national  virtue.  The 
kindness  of  the  Hivites  and  the  Hittites  towards  their 
fathers  was  forgotten.  It  was  perhaps  at  this  time 
that  they  circulated  the  pretended  oracles  of  the  God 
of  Bethel,  local  divinity  of  Palestine,  or  of  Iahveh, 
who  had  promised  the  ancestors  of  the  nation  to  give 
them  this  land.  Each  country  belonged  to  a god  who 
bestowed  it  on  w7hom  he  wished.  If  the  god  of  Bethel 
had  really  promised  the  land  of  Canaan  to  Beni- Israel, 
that  was  decisive.  The  people  must  have  had  pre- 
conceived ideas  on  this  subject ; for,  between  the 
desert  where  they  wandered  and  the  land  of  Canaan, 
there  were  populations  established,  Edom  and  Moab, 
over  whose  territory  they  would  be  obliged  to  pass 
in  order  to  reach  Canaan,  and  who,  according  to  all 
appearances,  would  be  little  friendly  towards  brothers 
from  whom  they  were  separated  by  centuries  and 
different  adventures. 

What  leads  one  to  believe  that  this  idea  occurred  to 
the  Israelites  when  they  had  arrived  near  Asion-Gaber 
is  that  their  route  was  no  longer  capricious.  Canaan 
was  clearly  their  objective.  The  shortest  road  was 
to  reach  Canaan  by  Negeb,  that  is  to  say  by  the 
south.  In  fact,  from  Asion-Gaber  the  Israelites  went 


JOURNEYING  TOWARDS  CANAAN. 


*73 


to  Kades-Barnea,  the  last  place  where  their  ancestors 
had  halted  before  entering  Egypt.  This  must  have 
been  the  most  trying  part  of  their  journey.  They 
retained  no  recollection  of  any  intermediary  halt- 
ing-place between  Asion-Gaber  and  Kades-Barnea, 
because  in  fact  along  this  terrible  road,  devoid 
of  all  the  necessaries  of  life,  there  was  no  resting- 
place. 

Kades-Barnea  had  a fine  spring  called  11  the  Spring 
of  Judgment,”  perhaps  because  people  consulted  it 
for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  certain  oracles  or  judg- 
ments of  God.* * * §  Kades  was  on  the  border  of  Edom, 
but  it  was  a sort  of  common  halting-place,  and  not  an 
Edomite  town.  It  was  there,  it  appears,  that  the 
elders  formed  precise  plans  for  the  conquest  of 
Canaan. j*  It  was  there  above  all  that  they  opened 
negotiations  with  Edom.  The  Edomites  had  already 
organised  a kingdom.  The  Israelites  wished  to  pass 
through  their  territory  on  the  footing  of  perfect 
neutrality.  The  Edomites  refused.^  The  situation 
became  critical.  The  Amalekites  threatened  their 
rear.§  The  Canaanites,  finding  their  position  me- 
naced, prepared  to  defend  themselves.  Arad,||  the 
King  of  Canaan,  who  appears  to  have  been  at  that 

* Gesenius,  at  words,  imp  and  ru’HE- 

f The  details  which  follow  appear  historical,  and  were  probably 
borrowed  from  the  book  of  Wars  of  Iahveh.  Judges,  ch.  ix. 

1 Numbers,  ch.  xx.,  v.  14  and  following. 

§ Numbers,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  39  and  following. 

||  Numbers,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  1 and  following  ; ch.  xxiii.,  v.  40 
(characteristic  omission). 


i74  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

time  the  most  powerful  monarch  in  those  countries, 
attacked  the  Israelites  and  made  some  of  them 
prisoners.  The  King  of  Sefat  inflicted  a terrible 
reverse  upon  them,  in  consequence  of  which  they  made 
a vow  to  Iahveh  to  exterminate  that  city  and  all 
the  surrounding  villages  of  the  Canaanites.  * 

Finding  it  impossible  to  pass  from  the  south  to  the 
north  of  Edom,  the  Israelites  determined  to  turn  the 
country,  and,  passing  to  the  south  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
to  reach  the  country  of  Moab.  The  route  which  they 
pursued  from  Kades  to  the  frontier  of  Moab  is  very 
uncertain.  It  appears  that  the  Israelites  turned  off 
sharp  to  the  east,  crossed  the  Wadi  Arabah,  wandered 
to  the  east  of  the  Arabah,  in  countries  but  little 
known,  and  approached  the  country  of  Moab  by  its 
eastern  frontier,  at  a place  named  Iyye  ha- Abarim, 
u the  ruins  of  Abarim.”  Abarim  was  the  name  of 
the  mountains  or  rather  the  lofty  tableland  which 
forms  the  eastern  bank  of  the  Dead  Sea.  The  Iyyim 
of  the  Abarim  were  perhaps  the  lesser  chains  of  the 
Abarim  on  the  desert  side.f 

What,  under  these  circumstances,  were  the  relations 
between  Israel  and  their  Moabite  brethren  ? Probably 
similar  to  the  relations  which  had  existed  between 
Israel  and  their  Edomite  brethren.  J Distrust  was 

the  ruling  passion  e.f  this  people,  full  of  hatred  and 

* Numbers,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  45;  ch.  xxi.,  v.  1 — 3;  Deuteronomy, 
ch.  i.,  v.  44  ; Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  17. 

f Numbers,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  10.  There  was  a place  called  Iyyim  in 
Judah. 

J Numbers,  ch.  xx.,  v.  14.  Compare  Judges,  ch.  ix. 


JOURNEYING  TOWARDS  CANAAN.  175 

coyeteousness.  It  seems,  in  fact,  that  the  Israelites 
avoided  passing  through  the  land  of  Moab.*  From 
Iyye  ha-Abarim  they  went  and  pitched  their  camps  in 
the  ravine  of  Zared.  Thence,  instead  of  entering  into 
Moab,  they  went  by  way  of  the  desert.  At  Beer,  the 
discovery  of  a spring,  by  means  of  a divining  rod, 
gave  rise  to  the  following  song,  which  one  must 
suppose  to  have  been  sung  in  chorus. *j* 

Spring  up,  0 well ; sing  ye  unto  it.  The  princes  digged  the 
well,  the  nobles  of  the  people  digged  it 

This  song  afterwards  became  the  origin  of  miracu- 
lous stories.  It  was  pretended  that  Moses  caused  the 
water  to  flow  by  striking  the  rock  with  his  wand. 

The  people  afterwards  encamped  in  the  ravine  of 
the  upper  bed  of  the  Aron,  which  they  called  Nahaliel, 
“ the  ravine  of  God.”  Here  the  situation  became  more 
serious.  They  were  on  the  frontier  of  Moab,  of  Ammon, 
and  of  the  country  occupied  by  the  Canaanites.  Ammon 
was  too  strong  for  them  to  dream  of  attacking  it.$ 
Israel  professed  friendly  feelings  towards  Moab  at  that 
moment.  It  was  therefore  decided  to  attack  the  Canaan- 
ites, and  an  armed  body  rushed  boldly  on  Bamoth 
and  on  Daibon,  which  seem  to  have  been  carried  with- 
out resistance. 

On  debouching  from  Nahaliel  the  Israelites  left  the 
desert,  the  land  of  nomads,  for  countries  more  regularly 

* The  list  of  halting-places  in  Numbers,  ch.  xxxiii.,  is  in  contra- 
diction with  that  of  Numbers,  ch.  xxi. 

t Numbers,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  15.  Borrowed  from  Wars  of  Iahveh. 

J Numbers,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  24. 


I76  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

inhabited.  Ilere  we  see  them  entered  into  that  land, 
the  object  of  their  aspirations,  which  they  were  going 
to  appropriate  by  violence,  but  whose  conquest  they 
legitimised,  because  they  were  about  to  make  of  a 
moderately  favoured  district  perhaps  the  most  cele- 
brated spot  on  the  surface  of  our  planet,  the  holy  land 
par  excellence , the  land  the  most  loved,  the  most 
regretted,  that  ever  existed. 

How  long  was  it  since  they  had  left  Egypt  ? Per- 
haps only  a very  short  time.  We  may  willingly  sup- 
pose a year  or  eighteen  months.  It  was  a passage,  not 
a sojourn.  Put  never  was  a journey  more  fruitful. 
Each  impression  of  those  months  of  crisis  was  rich  in 
consequences  for  the  future.  Judaism  was  destined 
entirely,  some  centuries  later,  to  found  itself  on  the 
legends  relating  to  the  flight  from  Egypt  to  the  desert 
and  to  Sinai. 

Worship  during  this  period  must  have  returned  to 
patriarchal  simplicity.  In  remarkable  places  altars  or 
pillars  were  raised,  which  were  called  iad  (finger  post), 
or  nes  (rallying  post).*  The  ark,  a sacred  piece  of 
furniture  of  Egyptian  origin,  assumed  importance. 
They  shut  up  in  it  everything  of  general  interest ; it 
formed,  so  to  speak,  the  portable  archives  of  the  nation. 
According  to  conceptions  which  obtained  at  least  to  the 
ninth  century,  the  ark  at  some  distance  went  before 
the  people  while  they  were  going  from  one  camp  to 
another.  According  to  the  same  traditions,  when  the 
ark  set  forward  they  cried,  “ Bise  up,  Lord,  and  let 

* Exodus,  ck.  xvii.,  v.  15,  16. 


JOURNEYING  TOWARDS  CANAAN. 


1 77 


thine  enemies  be  scattered.”  And,  on  the  contrary, 
when  it  rested,  “Return,  0 Lord,  unto  the  many 
thousands  of  Israel.” 

We  possess,  in  fact,  a religious  song  of  which  this 
cry  forms  as  it  were  the  principal  note.* * * §  It  is  the  most 
singular  composition  in  Hebrew  literature.  We  seem 
to  hear  the  distant  echo  of  the  triumphal  peregrina- 
tions of  the  travelling  deity  across  the  desert. f In  it 
Sinai  figures  as  the  place  of  the  highest  theophany, 
not  as  the  place  where  the  Thora  was  given.  The 
extreme  obscurity  of  the  style  of  this  dithyrambic  is  a 
sign  of  its  antiquity,  although  certainly  more  modern 
sentiments  penetrate  here  and  there.  It  would  not  be 
surprising  if  we  had  here  a specimen  altered,  or  rather 
adapted  to  the  liturgic  forms  £ of  some  of  the  canticles 
of  the  Wars  of  Iahv eh , or  of  Jasar.  § The  old  collec- 
tion opened,  in  fact,  with  canticles  descriptive  of  the 
approach  to  the  land  of  Canaan  and  of  the  last  marches 
in  the  desert. 

The  probability  is  that  where  a halt  was  made  the 
Ark  was  placed  outside  the  camp  under  a tent.  This 
was  what  they  called  ohel  moed , the  tent  of  meeting,  or 
ohel  edouth , the  tent  of  the  covenant.  Perhaps  they 

* Psalm  Ixviil. 

t Especially  v.  1 — 25. 

X This  song  may  have  served  for  the  inauguration  of  the 
temple  (v.  16,  25 — 28).  The  passage  v.  18  ought  surely 
to  be  corrected  bvrW''  according  to  Numbers, 

ch.  x.,  v.  36. 

§ Especially  the  passage  v.  12 — 15  is  full  of  the  epic  spirit  of 
the  ancient  sirim. 


178  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL 


already  went  there  for  judgments,  divine  oracles,  and 
to  take  oaths.  God  was  supposed  to  he  there  in 
person.  They  believed  that  a cloud  descended,  re- 
mained at  the  entrance,  and  conversed  with  the  leaders.* 
More  communicative  than  that  of  Sinai  this  God 
allowed  them  to  approach  him ; they  spoke  with  him. 
The  God  of  Israel  became  human;  he  made  himself 
the  companion  of  men,  more  especially  the  companion 
of  the  poor  and  needy. j*  The  tabernaculum  Dei  cum 
hominibus  existed  from  that  moment. 

But  this  was  only  a germ.  The  institutions  had  still 
something  undefined  about  them.  The  barbarism  was 
extreme ; there  was  nothing  civilising  nor  moralising 
in  the  teaching  of  the  Levites.  The  Israelites  did  not 
employ  writing.  What  took  place  among  them, 
although  already  exceedingly  remarkable,  did  not  differ 
much  from  the  domestic  life,  so  original,  of  the  other 
Teracliite,  Ishmaelite,  and  Keturean  tribes,  which 
spread  over  the  southern  confines  of  Syria.  Their 
philosophy  wavered  between  two  contradictory  asser- 
tions, u God  is  eternal ; man  lives  four  days ; God 
governs  the  world  with  justice  and  omnipotence; 
and  yet  there  is  injustice  everywhere.  Man  is  au- 
dacious to  complain;  and  yet  he  has  a right  to  com- 
plain.” The  patriarchal  era  was  drawing  to  a close; 
nations  were  beginning  ; human  society  was  losing 
its  nobility  and  its  goodness ; it  demanded  a wider 
and  more  vigorous  range. 

* Exodus,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  7-11. 

f Psalm  lxviii.,  y.  6,  7. 


BOOK  II. 


TEE  BENI-ISRAEL  AS  FIXED  TRIBES  FROM  TEE 
OCCUPATION  OF  TEE  COUNTRY  OF  CANAAN 
TO  TEE  DEFINITIVE  ESTABLISEMENT  OF  TEE 
KINGDOM  OF  DAVID. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  BENI-ISRAEL  BEYOND  THE  DEAD  SEA  AND  THE 
JORDAN. 

When  the  tribes  of  Israel  appeared  on  the  heights 
above  the  wells  of  Nahaliel  (towards  1350  b.c.)  the 
country  beyond  the  Dead  Sea  had  just  been  the  theatre 
of  memorable  events.*  The  Canaanite  section  of  the 
Amorites,  who  appear  to  have  come  from  Hebron  and 
Hasason-Tamar  (afterwards  called  Engaddi),  had  as- 
sumed, in  becoming  the  centre  of  a confederation  of 
tribes  previously  known  under  other  names,  a very 
considerable  position.  Enclosed  up  to  that  time,  on 
the  east,  by  the  Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea,  the  Amorites 
had  overflowed  eastward,  and  had  formed  two  trans- 
Jordan  kingdoms  : the  kingdom  of  Basan  (Batan^e), 
whose  capital  was  Astaroth-Carnaim,  and  a kingdom 
further  south,  bounded  on  the  north  by  the  Iabbok,  on 
the  south  by  the  Arnon,  and  whose  capital  was  Heshbon. 

* Numbers,  ch.  xxi. ; Judges,  ch.  xi.,  v.  13  and  following. 


/8o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


IXeslibon  and  all  the  country  to  the  north  of  the  Arnon 
had  up  to  that  time  belonged  to  the  kingdom  of  Moab, 
which  thus  lost,  by  the  Amorite  invasion,  all  the 
southern  portion  of  its  territory.  This  was  probably 
the  cause  of  the  favour  with  which  the  Moabites 
received  Israel  when  it  made  its  appearance  in  the 
regions  of  Abarim. 

Sihon,  the  founder  of  the  Amorite  kingdom  of 
Heshbon,assembled  his  army  to  meet  the  new  invaders. 
The  battle  took  place  at  Iahas.  The  defeat  of  Sihon 
was  complete.  The  Israelites  seized  on  all  the  country 
from  Arnon  to  Iabok. 

Ileshbon  fell  into  their  hands.  This  was  the  first 
great  victory  won  in  the  name  of  Iahveh.  Ileshbon 
was  a beautiful  acropolis  in  the  middle  of  a fertile  and 
well-watered  country.  The  conquest  of  this  important 
place  gave  rise  to  a song  of  which  some  strophes  have 
been  preserved.*  The  poet  first  of  all  shows  the  power 
of  Sihon,  and  relates  the  defeat  of  Moab.  He  supposes 
an  appeal  made  by  the  conqueror  to  the  neighbouring 
populations  to  come  and  rebuild  Heshbon. 

Come  unto  Heshbon ; let  the  city  of  Sihon  be  built  and 
prepared. 

***** 

Woe  to  thee,  Moab  1 Thou  art  undone,  0 people  of  Cher- 
mosh ; he  hath  given  his  sons  that  escaped,  and  his  daughters, 
into  captivity  unto  Sihon,  king  of  the  Amorites. 

***** 

But  Israel  was  stronger  than  the  conquerors  of 
Moab. 

* Numbers,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  27 — 80.  Taken  from  the  Wars  of 

Iahveh. 


THE  BENI- ISRAEL  BEYOND  THE  DEAD  SEA.  181 


“ We  have  shot  at  them  ; Heshbon  is  perished  even  unto  Dibon, 
and  we  laid  them  waste  even  unto  Nophah,  which  reacheth  unto 
Medebah.” 

The  town  of  Jaazer,  which  formed  part  of  the  city 
of  Silion,  fell  after  Heshbon,  and  from  that  time  Israel 
was  master  of  the  country  from  Jabbok  to  the  Arnon. 
This  was  what  was  called  by  the  generic  name  of  the 
country  of  Gilead.  This  conquest,  rapidly  executed, 
leads  one  to  suppose  that  the  chiefs  who  planned  it 
were  endowed  with  real  military  talent.  According  to 
the  authors  of  the  Thora,  Moses  was  still  alive  at  this 
epoch,  having  at  his  side  his  lieutenant  Joshua.  In 
the  book  of  the  Wars  of  Iahveh , Moses  had  disappeared 
before  the  country  of  Moab  was  approached.  The  Song 
of  Beer,  the  whole  episode  of  Baalam  supposes  his 
absence;  and  certainly,  if  the  old  text  had  admitted 
that  Moses  still  existed  during  the  wars  between  Sihon 
and  Og,  some  miraculous  intervention  would  have  been 
attributed  to  him  in  the  battles,  as  at  Bephidim. 

The  destruction  of  the  Amorite  kingdom  of  Bashan 
closely  followed  the  destruction  of  the  Amorite  king- 
dom of  Heshbon  and  of  Jaazer.  Og,*  King  of  Bashan, 
was  defeated  at  Edrei.  The  rich  country  which  stretches 
from  the  mountains  of  Hor  to  the  Lake  of  Tiberias 
and  to  the  Jordan  became  the  possession  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel.  A powerful  family  animated  with  mili- 
tary instincts,  that  of  the  Makarites,  contributed  in  a 
great  degree  to  this  conquest,  and  thenceforth  settled 

* Og  was  enveloped  in  legends  (Deuteronomy,  ch.  iii.,  v.  2).  It 
is  possible  that  when  the  Wars  of  Iahveh  was  written  the  name 
of  the  last  king  of  Bashan  was  not  known. 


1 82  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


in  the  plains  of  Hor.  The  Makarites  formed  part  of 
the  Manasseh  branch  of  the  family  of  Joseph,  which 
preserved  more  than  ever  its  ascendency  over  the  rest 
of  Israel. 

These  two  great  wars  had  given  a very  advantageous 
position  to  Beni-Israel.  The  two  kingdoms  of  Sihon 
and  of  Og,  become  their  domain,  brought  them  an 
extent  of  territory  over  thirty-five  leagues  in  length, 
which  amply  sufficed  for  their  numbers.  It  is  pro- 
bable, in  fact,  that  after  the  conquest  of  the  kingdom 
of  Bashan  there  was  a breathing  time.  The  tribes  no 
doubt  waited,  before  passing  the  Jordan,  until  the  fertile 
country  they  occupied  had  coine  to  be  too  small  for 
them.  These  were  years  of  youth  and  vigour.  The 
centre  of  Israel  at  this  epoch  was  what  was  called 
Arboth-Moab , “the  plains  of  Moab.”  This  was  a plain 
situated  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan,  opposite  Jericho, 
at  the  foot  of  Mount  Nebo,  and,  more  strictly  speaking, 
the  place  called  Shittim,  “the  acacias.”  The  ark  re- 
mained at  this  place  under  a tent,  and  constituted  as 
it  were  the  vital  knot  of  the  nation. 

This  apparition  of  a new  force  in  the  little  world 
of  Palestine,  already  overcrowded,  naturally  excited 
the  most  lively  apprehensions  on  the  part  of  the  primi- 
tive settlers.  Ammon  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
very  much  alarmed;  Moab,  already  so  weakened 
by  the  Amorites,  was  obliged  to  confine  itself  to  in- 
trigues. In  the  oldest  historical  books  is  to  be  found 
a curious  tale  on  this  subject,  attributed  to  Balak, 
the  son  of  Zippor,  an  assumed  King  of  Moab.  The 


THE  BENI-ISRA EL  BEYOND  THE  DEAD  SEA.  183 


ndbi  existed  at  this  epoch  among  the  Semitic  races, 
but  of  a very  different  character  to  that  which  he 
afterwards  assumed.  He  was  still  the  sorcerer,  the 
man  possessing  mysterious  secrets,  who  was  in  daily 
communication  with  the  elohim.  These  nobis  consti- 
tuted a redoubtable  power.  Supernatural  gifts  were 
attributed  to  them,  as  also  a profound  knowledge  in 
the  art  of  divination.  Their  curse  was  supposed  to 
operate  infallibly  and  without  any  aid.  Sometimes 
they  were  called  upon  to  curse  certain  days  which 
were  regarded  as  unlucky.*  On  other  occasions  they 
were  highly  paid  to  curse  those  whose  perdition  was 
desired.']'  It  was  believed  that  their  curses  struck 
home,  and  these  howlers  were  engaged  to  pour  out 
against  the  enemy  torrents  of  abuse,  supposed  to  be 
efficacious.^  It  was  almost  always  by  powerful 
parallelisms,  by  carmina  in  parabolic  style,  that  these 
magic  spells,  considered  infallible  in  their  effects,  were 
expressed. § 

The  most  celebrated  of  these  sorcerers  at  that  time 
was,  according  to  the  legend,  a certain  Baalam,  the 
son  of  Beor,  who  came  from  a town  called  Pethor. 
Balak  sent  for  him,  gave  him  large  sums  of  money, 
and  made  him  the  most  superb  promises.  He  was 
taken  to  a high  place  called  Bamoth-Baal,  near 
Ataroth,  in  that  part  of  ancient  Moab  which  Israel 
has  just  conquered.  From  thence  could  be  seen  the 

* Job,  ch.  iii. 

f Numbers,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  7 — 17. 

t See  Isaiah,  ch.  xv.  and  xvi.,  the  lamentation  of  Moab. 

§ Numbers,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  6. 


i 8+  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL 

first  encampments  of  Israel.  How  it  is  related  that 
in  spite  of  all  the  efforts  which  Eaalam  made  to 
curse  Israel,  the  words  were  in  his  mouth  con- 
verted into  blessings.  Later  on,  this  episode  became 
the  foundation  for  some  curious  tales.  About  the  time 
of  David,  the  oracles  which  Balaam  was  supposed  to 
have  pronounced  were  written  in  the  finest  rhythm 
of  ancient  poetry,  and  with  these  compositions  a sibyl- 
line framework  was  constructed  for  the  predictions 
relative  to  the  future  of  Israel  and  of  other  nations.* 

The  intimate  relationship  between  Moab  and  Israel 
prevented  any  sanguinary  war  between  them.  It 
was  not  the  same  with  Midian.f  The  Midianites  had 
not  managed  to  make  any  fixed  conquest.  Like  the 
Amalekites  they  were  everywhere  to  be  found  in  the 
deserts  to  the  east  of  the  Dead  Sea.  We  have  seen 
them,  during  the  flight  from  Egypt,  entering  into 
relations  with  Moses,  through  their  colien  Jethro. 
Then  we  saw  them  struggling  with  the  Edomites  in 
the  land  of  Moab.iJ:  It  was  this  northern  branch  of 

the  Midianites  which  got  into  a serious  conflict  with 

* The  episode  of  Balaam,  in  its  present  form  (Numbers,  cb. 
xxii.,  xxiii.,  xxiv.),  is  a Jehovist  and  Elohist  combination,  after 
the  manner  of  ancient  records,  that  of  the  deluge  for  example.  The 
foundation  is  borrowed  from  the  Wars  of  Iahveh  like  what  pre- 
cedes it  in  Numbers,  ch.  xxi.  It  will  be  remarked  that  Moses  is 
not  mentioned  there,  when  it  was  only  natural  that  he  should  have 
performed  his  part.  There  is  nothing  authentic  in  the  masal  but 
the  form.  From  ch.  xxiv.,  v.  20,  the  interpolations  are  clear. 

t Midian  was  only  connected  to  Abraham  by  the  slave  Cethura, 
like  Ishmael  by  the  slave  Hagar. 

\ Genesis,  ch.  xxxvi.,  v.  35. 


THE  BENI- ISRAEL  BEYOND  THE  DEAD  SEA.  185 

Israel.  The  war  was  a terrible  one.  The  branch  of 
Midian  engaged  in  the  battle  was  exterminated  with  its 
five  kings.  All  the  males  were  put  to  death ; the  women 
and  the  flocks  were  carried  away  captive.* 

These  military  successes  on  the  part  of  Israel 
surprise  one  at  first  sight.  Israel  had  no  warlike 
proclivities  during  its  patriarchal  period,  nor  during 
its  sojourn  in  Egypt.  At  the  epoch  of  the  Judges  it 
often  exhibited  weakness  towards  its  neighbours. 
Later  on,  if  one  excepts  the  time  of  Saul  and  of 
David,  the  qualities  displayed  by  Israel  were  not  of  a 
military  order.  One  is  tempted  to  believe  that  the 
military  superiority  shown  by  this  band  of  fugitives 
in  regard  to  the  tribes  in  the  region  of  Jordan  was 
derived  from  the  Egyptians  which  it  counted  in  its 
ranks,  and  particularly  to  Moses,  who  must  be  con- 
sidered as  almost  an  Egyptian,  whose  real  part  was 
much  more,  it  would  appear,  that  of  a chief  after  the 
fashion  of  Abd-el-Kader  than  that  of  a prophet  like 
Mahomet.  Their  arms  may  have  been  better  than 
those  of  the  tribes  they  fought  with.  Between  bar- 
barians, the  smallest  element  of  civilisation  gives  to 
the  tribe  which  possesses  it  immense  advantages  over 
the  tribes  who  have  nothing  but  the  primitive  weapons 
handed  down  from  the  past. 

During  that  long  sojourn,  intermixed  with  cam- 
paigns always  successful,  in  a country  then  rich,  there 
was  no  doubt  in  the  bosom  of  Israel  a powerful  work 
of  internal  organisation  going  on.  A number  of 

* Numbers,  ck.  xxxi. ; Joshua,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  21. 


1 86  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

families  established  themselves  in  a permanent 
manner.*  "VYe  have  seen  how  the  Manassite  family  of 
Makir  took  the  principal  part  in  the  conquest  of  Hor. 
A great  portion  of  it  remained  in  the  land  it  had 
conquered.  The  lands  of  Jaazer  and  Gilead  were 
exceedingly  good  for  the  rearing  of  cattle.  The 
Reubenites  and  the  Gadites,  who  had  large  flocks, 
appropriated  them.  The  first  established  themselves 
in  the  ancient  country  of  Moab  situated  to  the  north 
of  the  Arnon,  which  the  Amorites  had  taken  from 
Moab,  and  which  the  Israelites  had  recaptured  from  the 
Amorites.  The  cities  of  Ataroth,  Daibon,  Heshbon, 
Eleale,  Baal-Meon  fell  to  Reuben.  The  cities  of 
Jaazer,  Nimra,  and  the  intersected  tableland  to  the 
east  of  Jordan  fell  to  Gad.  On  its  left  bank  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan  is  narrow.  Agriculture  could 
not  flourish  in  such  a country ; it  remained  always 
essentially  pastoral. 

Besides,  the  ancient  race  was  far  from  having 
disappeared.  The  population  of  Israel  was  very 
inconsiderable.  Shut  up  in  strong  cities,  it  saw  it- 
self surrounded  by  hostile  tribesf  who  wanted  only 
a patriotic  rallying  point.  The  names  of  a cer- 
tain number  of  places  were  changed  and  called 
after  their  new  proprietors.^  But  they  did  not 
long  endure.  The  old  names  were  restored.  Thus 
Kenatli,  at  the  foot  of  the  mountain  of  Hor,  which 

* Numbers,  cb.  xxxii.,  v.  16  and  following. 

t Numbers,  cb.  xxxii.,  v.  17. 

J Numbers,  ch.  xxxii.,  v.  38,  41,  42. 


THE  BEN1-ISRA EL  BEYOND  THE  DEAD  SEA.  187 

was  captured  by  the  Manassite  Nobah,  was  for  some 
time  called  Nob  all,*  then  it  resumed  its  ancient 
name  Canatha  or  Canotha,  which  still  exists  as 
Kenawat. 

* Judges,  ch.  viii.,  v.  11. 


CHAPTEE  II. 


THE  CONQUEST  OF  THE  REGION  BEYOND  JORDAN. 

In  the  plain  of  Shittim  the  people  had  under  their 
eyes  a spectacle  which  perpetually  excited  their 
greed.  The  Jordan  alone  separated  them  from  a land 
wrhich  was  even  superior  to  that  which  they  occupied; 
more  and  more  they  imagined  that  this  land  had  been 
promised  to  them  by  the  God  of  their  fathers.  Oppo- 
site to  them  the  important  city  of  Jericho  stood 
out  like  a challenge.  These  old  excitable  races 
drew  no  line  between  their  desire  and  their  duty.  The 
Moabite  king  Mesa  made  no  conquest  unless  it  were 
ordered  by  his  god  Camos.*  It  is  probable  that 
upon  divers  occasions  the  national  God,  Iahveli, 
commanded  the  Israelites  to  cross  the  Jordan  by  signs 
which  were  considered  as  compulsory. 

The  land  which  Israel  had  in  view  was  a ridge, 
sixty  miles  broad  at  its  base,  separating  the  Medi- 
terranean from  the  deep  bed  in  which  the  Jordan 
flows,  and  of  which  the  Dead  Sea  is  as  it  were  the 
central  basin.  The  height  above  the  Mediterranean 
is  nearly  3,300  feet;  the  height  above  the  Dead 
Sea  and  the  lower  Jordan  is  4,000  feet;  for  there  is 
* Inscription,  lines  9,  12,  13,  14,  18,  32. 


CONQUEST  OF  REGION  BEYOND  JORDAN.  i8g 

% 

a deep  depression  at  this  spot.  The  foot  of  the  slopes 
reaches  neither  to  the  Mediterranean  nor  to  the  Jor- 
dan. Like  a continuation  of  the  sands  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean, these  plains  stretch  to  the  west,  and  are  sus- 
ceptible of  being  richly  cultivated  (the  Saron).  On 
the  side  of  Jordan  the  lesser  mountain  chains  fall 
away  in  an  abrupt  manner  to  within  ten  or  twelve 
miles  from  the  river,  and  at  their  foot  is  formed  an 
alluvial  plain,  which  would,  one  might  suppose,  bo 
a source  of  wealth  to  the  country.  It  is  not  so. 
This  plain  (Ghor)  is  unhealthy,  and  has  never  played 
a considerable  part  in  the  history  of  the  country. 
Israel,  on  the  other  hand,  showed  no  tendency  to 
approach  the  bank.  The  Saron  remained  always 
in  the  hands  of  the  Canaanites.  It  is  the  hog’s 
back  stretching  between  Saron  and  Ghor,  which  was 
the  theatre  of  the  astonishing  history  I am  now 
writing. 

As  the  country  of  Gilead,  beyond  Jordan,  is  de- 
signed by  nature  for  a pastoral  life,  so  is  Palestine 
on  this  side  of  Jordan  designed  for  agriculture  and 
living  in  cities.*  One  must  not  look  at  these  matters 
after  our  European  ideas  of  a deep,  black  soil,  unceas- 
ingly watered  and  covered  with  rich  verdue.  These 
ridges,  in  appearance  arid,  are  rich  after  their 
fashion.  To  half-starved  people  coming  from  Africa 
they  must  appear  sparkling  with  wealth.  The  vine, 
the  olive,  and  the  fig-tree  prosper  there.  Corn  grows  in 
sufficient  quantities.  There  is  no  want  of  water.  The 

* Josephus,  B.  J.,  III.,  x.  7. 
p 2 


1 9o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


cold  is  never  excessive,  and  it  rains  a great  deal  in  the 
winter ; all  through  the  year  the  altitude  at  which  one 
lives  renders  the  heat  very  supportable.  No  great  city 
could  have  developed  itself  on  these  heights,  deprived 
of  large  waterways  ; hut  an  agricultural  population, 
grouped  in  small  towns  lying  close  to  each  other,  could 
find  there  the  essential  conditions  of  material  welfare 
without  which  no  human  society  can  accomplish  an 
original  evolution. 

The  Canaanite  populations  which,  as  it  appears, 
already  occupied  the  country  when  the  Hebrews  passed 
there  the  first  time  had  lost  a great  deal  of  their 
ancient  vigour.  The  Amorites  had  exhausted  them- 
selves in  concentrating  all  their  forces  to  the  east  of 
Jordan ; the  Hittites  of  Debir,  of  Kiriat-Arba,  or  Heb- 
ron, had  also  lost  much  of  their  importance  since  the 
time  when  their  name  erroneously  represented  for  the 
Egyptians  the  whole  of  Syria.  The  victories  of  Ramses 
had  greatly  diminished  them.  The  Hivites  lived  peace- 
fully at  Gabaon  and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Sichem. 
Little  is  known  of  the  Perizzites ; it  is  even  a question 
whether  they  had  any  fixed  territory.  The  Girgishites 
resided  obscurely  in  their  city  of  Gergesa , on  the 
eastern  shore  of  the  Lake  of  Genesareth.*  The  Jebu- 
sites  were  much  more  powerful.  Their  territory  was 
not  large,  but  their  city  of  Jebus,  or  Jerusalem,  t was 

* See  Vie  de  Jesus,  p.  151,  note  1. 

t It  may  with  equal  force  be  urged  that  this  name  was  given 
by  David  or  by  the  Canaanites.  The  root  slm  appears  to  mean 
“ place  of  safety.” 


CONQUEST  OF  REGION  BEYOND  JORDAN.  19 1 

considered  in  those  days  as  an  exceedingly  strong 
place. 

In  the  midst  of  these  Canaanites  regularly  estab- 
lished in  the  towns,  there  roamed,  as  in  the  times  of  the 
patriarchs,  nomads  without  any  fixed  dwelling,  such  as 
the  Amalekites,  and  other  tribes  leading  a miserable 
existence,  like  gipsies  without  hearth  or  home.* 
People  saw  survivors  of  the  ancient  indigenous 
populations,  anterior  to  the  Canaanites  ( Emim , Zom- 
zommim , Anal  dm),  in  individuals  of  lofty  stature  whom 
they  believed  to  be  dwellers  in  certain  particular 
places. f But  popular  imagination  revels  in  giants  ; 
it  willingly  creates  them.  These  Anakim  were  sur- 
rounded by  legends ; X they  sometimes  called  them 
refa'im  (the  dead,  the  giants,  the  phantoms,  the 
heroes)  ; a plain  to  the  south-west  of  Jerusalem  bore 
their  name,  and  they  were  confounded  with  the  Titanic 
races  buried  beneath  the  sea. 

The  language  of  the  Canaanites,  as  we  have  already 
observed,  was  the  same  as  that  of  the  Sidonians  or 
the  Phoenicians,  and  consequently  very  little  different 
from  that  of  the  Hebrew  people.  Writing  was  not 
employed  among  them.  We  have,  however,  an 
authentic  and  considerable  specimen  of  their  lan- 
guage ; it  is  the  onomastic  on  of  the  geography  of 
Palestine,  especially  the  names  of  the  towns.  The 

* Job,  ch.  xxx. 

f Numbers,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  28,  82  and  following. 

J The  Book  of  Joshua,  ch.  xii.,  xiii.,  xiv.,  xv.,  greatly 
exaggerates  the  importance  of  the  Anakims. 


1 92  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

Israelites  changed  hardly  any  names  of  villages  or 
towns,  as  is  proved  by  the  localities  pointed  out  in  the 
Book  of  Joshua  itself  as  having  remained  Canaanite. 
In  the  countries  where  the  Israelites  became  masters, 
the  names  were  seldom  modified ; even  the  words 
Jerusalem  and  Sion  appear  to  belong  to  a previous 
period.  This  holds  even  truer  of  the  names  of 
rivers  and  mountains  and  words  employed  to  denote 
things  characteristic  of  the  country.  Now  these 
old  Canaanite  names,  often  obscure,  which  is  only 
natural,  when  we  hear  in  mind  their  great  antiquity, 
do  not  materially  differ  from  the  language  of  the 
Israelite  invaders,  not  more  indeed  than  from  the 
more  ancient  invaders,  Moabites,  Edomites,  Ammo- 
nites, &c.  The  Philistines  alone,  in  this  linguistic 
region,  present  an  exception.  A mixed  marriage 
between  Israelite  and  Philistine  is  never  spoken  of.* 
Although  identical,  as  far  as  race  goes,  with  the 
populations  of  the  coast,  who  became  so  celebrated 
under  the  name  of  Phoenicians,  and  with  the  Canaanites 
of  Africa,  or  Carthaginians,  •f  the  Canaanites  of  the 
interior  appear  to  have  remained  far  below  the 
Phoenicians  and  the  Carthaginians  in  the  matter  of 
civilisation.  Their  ornaments  of  dress  and  of  worship 
must  have  come  from  the  Phoenician  cities  of  the 
coast.  The  inhabitants  of  Laish,  at  the  foot  of 


* Remark  the  omission  of  Philistine  women,  First  Book  of 
Kings,  ch.  xi.,  v.  1.  It  was  not  considered  necessary  to  prohibit 
such  marriages.  The  two  races  were  too  different, 
t Passages  of  St.  Augustine  often  quoted. 


CONQUEST  OF  REGION  BEYOND  JORDAN.  193 

Hermon,  are  pointed  out  as  an  exception,  because 
they  lived  in  the  interior  “after  the  manner  of  the 
Sidonians,”  that  is  to  say  in  the  midst  of  ease  and 
luxury,  the  fruit  of  industry.  All  the  archeological 
vestiges  of  the  Canaanites  to  be  found  in  the  Palestine 
of  to-day  are  rude  without  art.  The  aspect  of  a 
Canaanite  city  could  not  have  differed  much  from  the 
poorest  locality  of  Syria  of  the  present  time.  Sump- 
tuous buildings  were  rare,  or  were  apparently  entirely 
wanting. 

The  worship  of  the  Canaanites  was  also  very  little 
different  from  that  of  the  Phoenicians,  especially 
from  that  of  the  Carthaginians.  According  to  the 
Egyptians,*  Baal  and  Sydyk  were  the  supreme  gods 
of  the  Khetas.  Sydyk,  in  fact,  seems  to  reappear 
in  the  names  of  the  Jebusitc  kings,  MaUcisedeq,  Acloni- 
sedcq.  Baal  assumed  a double  form,  and  took  the 
shape  of  a woman,  of  Astoreth  or  Astarte,  goddess  of 
love  and  of  voluptuousness,  origin  of  the  Aphrodite 
of  the  Greeks.  They  called  her  Asera , that  is  to  say 
the  Happy  Woman.  Her  images  or  symbols']*  were 
spread  through  the  country.:]:  The  worship  of  Baal 

and  of  Astoreth  or  Asera  was  performed  chiefly  on 

* Maspero,  Hist.  anc.  de  V Orient,  p.  232. 

t Probably  the  sign  ^ so  frequently  seen  on  Phoenician  and 

Carthaginian  monuments.  See  Corpus  inscr.  semit.,  part  i.,  t.  1, 
pp.  281  and  following,  428  and  following. 

J Mission  de  Phenicie , pp.  508,  509,  640,  653,  662,  663,  666, 
691.  These  images  were  called  aserim  or  azeroth,  as  the  images  of 
Baal  were  called  baalim.  In  the  same  way  we  speak  of  des  christs, 
des  bnns-dieux,  des  saintes-vierges. 


194  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


the  tops  of  hills,  in  the  midst  of  sacred  bowers 
and  of  green  trees.  This  was  what  was  called 
bamoth , or  high  places.  They  are  still  to  be  found 
at  every  step  in  Phoenicia,  especially  in  the  country 
of  Tyre,  in  the  ancient  territory  of  the  tribe  of 
Asher.*  Sacred  prostitution']*  and  the  practice  of 

making  their  first-born  pass  through  the  fire:]:  were 
among  the  bases  of  these  religions,  which  the 
nomad  Hebrews  viewed  with  horror,  but  which  they 
imitated  directly  they  were  settled.  So  true  is  it 
that  living  in  tents  alone  had  preserved  them  from 
those  rites. 

In  addition  to  the  high  places  of  the  Canaanites  there 
were  places  of  worship  of  unknown  origin,  such  as 
Bethel,  Sichem,  Garizim,  some  localities  in  Gilead, 
certain  places  called  Galgal,  which  the  Hebrews 
adopted  much  more  willingly,  for  they  were  held  to  be 
very  ancient,  and  it  was  related  that  the  fathers  had 
sacrificed  there.  The  title  upon  wdiicli  Israel  laid  the 
most  stress  in  order  to  establish  its  right  over  Pales- 
tine was  a sort  of  charter  of  Iahveh,  regarded  as  god 
of  Bethel.  § It  was  quite  in  the  spirit  of  antiquity, 
on  entering  a country,  to  adopt  the  local  god,  and  to 
endeavour  to  serve  him  according  to  his  tastes. j| 

* Mission  de  Phenicie,  Book  IV.,  ch.  iv. 

f Ibid.,  pp.  518,  585,  647—658,  662,  668. 

I Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  xvi.,  v.  3 and  following. 

§ Genesis,  ch.  xxviii.,  v.  13  and  following;  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  13  and 
following. 

||  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxvi.,  v.  19  ; Second  Book  of 
Kings,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  27  ; Ruth,  ch.  i.,  v.  16. 


CONQUEST  OF  REGION  BEYOND  JORDAN.  195 

What  grieved  David,  when  he  foresaw  his  exile,  was 
that  he  would  be  forced  to  sacrifice  to  other  gods 
than  Iahveh.*  Later  on  Naaraan  the  Syrian,  wish- 
ing to  offer  up  sacrifices  to  Iahveh,  at  Damascus, 
asked  leave  to  carry  with  him  two  mule  loads  of 
Canaanite  earth,  for  no  real  sacrifice  could  be  made 
to  Iahveh  except  upon  that  earth. f 

In  reality  these  Canaanites  represented  but  an  in- 
different form  of  human  society.  There  was  no  central 
organisation.  Every  fortified  hamlet  had  a melek , or 
king,  a little  military  chief  whose  authority  extended 
two  or  three  leagues  round. ^ Certain  tribes,  like 
the  Gibeonites,  formed  confederations  several  leagues 
in  extent.  Each  city  trusted  in  its  fortifications. 
Although  we  have  no  authentic  specimen  of  these 
military  works,  one  can  form  an  idea  of  them  from 
the  innumerable  tells  of  Palestine,  their  summits 
covered  with  ruins  and  their  flanks  carved  out  of  the 
rock. 

The  resistance  offered  by  the  Canaanite  tribes  was 
very  different,  according  as  they  lived  in  mountain  or 
plain.  In  the  mountains  the  Canaanites  everywhere 
fell  before  the  Israelites  ; in  the  plains,  on  the  con- 
trary, at  Saron,  at  Naphoth  Dor,  in  the  plain  of 
Jezrael,  atBeth-Sean,  in  Ghor,  the  Canaanites  defended 
themselves  victoriously.  The  cause  of  this  difference 
lay  in  the  chariots  of  war,  protected  with  iron,  which 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxvi.,  v.  19. 

t Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  v.,  v.  17. 

\ Joshua,  ch.  xii.,  v.  7. 


1 96  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

the  natives  possessed,  but  not  the  invaders.  These 
chariots,  terrible  in  the  plains,  were  useless  in  the 
mountains.  There  the  Canaanites  had  nothing  to 
defend  them  but  the  walls  of  their  towns.  The 
Israelites  had  no  knowledge  of  the  art  of  military 
engineering.  They  waited  and  finally  entered  the 
place  by  surprise  or  treason.* 

The  Canaanites  do  not  appear  to  have  had  any 
cavalry,  in  the  sense  in  which  we  understand  the  word, 
nor  had  the  assailants  any.  Personal  courage  consisted, 
on  both  sides,  of  that  furious  dash,  sometimes  artificially 
excited,  in  which  still  lies  the  force  of  the  Arab.  It 
seems  to  have  been  greater  and  more  obstinate  on  the 
part  of  the  Israelites. 

Both  sides  were  alike  cruel.  All  antiquity  was 
cruel.  Cruelty  was  an  advantage  not  to  be  dis- 
pensed with.  Ferocity  is  one  of  the  forces  of  bar- 
barians. The  fear  inspired  by  their  atrocities  makes 
people  submit  to  them.  One  of  the  essential  points 
of  Carthaginian  strategy  was  to  frighten  the  enemy 
by  their  tortures. t The  custom  of  cutting  off  the 
thumbs,  the  hands,  and  the  feet  of  the  conquered 
was  usual  among  the  Canaanites.  One  of  their 
little  tyrants  boasted  that  he  had  seen  seventy  kings, 
mutilated  in  this  manner,  pick  up  what  fell  from  his 
table.J 

As  for  the  Israelites,  their  cruelty,  if  one  is  to  believe 

* Thus  fell  Ai  and  Bethel. 

t Example  of  Agathocles. 

\ Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  7. 


CONQUEST  OF  REGION  BEFOND  JORDAN.  197 

the  ancient  records,  was  systematically  dictated  by 
religious  motives,  by  a kind  of  moral  puritanism  pro- 
duced by  the  crimes  committed  by  the  natives.  This 
is  doubtless  an  exaggeration  on  the  part  of  later  his- 
torians. The  invaders  do  not  appear  to  have  drawn 
up  any  plan  for  the  extermination  of  the  Canaanite 
race.  Later,  this  extermination  became  an  act  of  piety, 
commanded  by  Iahveh.  In  a number  of  instances 
there  was  an  understanding  arrived  at  between  the 
two  races.  The  Canaanites  accepted  a situation 
analogous  to  that  of  the  rajahs  under  the  Mussulmans. 
We  do  not  see  that  they  ever  revolted.  Under  the 
Judges  we  read  of  wars  against  the  Philistines,  against 
the  Ammonites,  &c.  We  do  not  read  of  any  against 
the  Jebusites,  the  Hivites,  &c.  The  first  wars,  those 
of  Joshua,  were  terrible.  After  the  victory  all  the 
male  inhabitants  of  the  Canaanites  were  slain  * the 
kings  were  massacred,  then  the  dead  bodies  were 
crucified.  Human  ferocity  assumed  the  form  of  a 
compact  with,  of  a vow  to,  the  Divinity:  oaths  of 
extermination  were  taken ; reason  and  pity  were  pro- 
hibited. A city  or  a country  was  condemned  to  de- 
struction, and  it  would  have  been  considered  an  insult 
to  their  god  not  to  have  kept  this  hideous  oath.* 
Pearful  examples  were  related  of  the  vengeance 
wreaked  by  the  god  on  those  who  wavered  in  the 
execution  of  these  fearful  engagements. 

* This  is  the  meaning  of  the  word  herein,  so  deplorably  repeated 
in  these  books.  See  Joshua,  ch.  vi.,  vii. ; First  Book  of  Samuel, 
ch.  xv. 


i98  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


The  contrast  is  strange  between  these  Eed  Indian 
customs,  reproduced  with  fearful  sincerity  in  ancient 
Israelite  history,  and  the  picture  of  patriarchal  life,  so 
noble,  so  humane,  so  pure,  traced  in  Genesis.  Of  a 
truth  this  picture  is  too  ideal  for  us  not  to  suspect  that 
it  has  been  embellished.  In  fact,  however,  seeing  the 
low  scale  of  Eastern  morality,  tent  life,  in  the  Semi- 
tique  or  Semitised  countries,  has  always  been  preferable 
to  that  in  the  towns.  A nation  which  has  a territory 
to  conquer  or  to  defend  is  always  more  cruel  than  the 
tribe  which  is  not  yet  attached  to  the  soil,  and  it  is 
thus  that  people  at  times,  merciful  while  living 
together  in  families,  become  cruel  when  they  form  a 
nation.  Then,  it  appears  that  people  in  ancient  times 
on  losing  their  simplicity  became  harsh  and  vindictive. 
Nations  at  their  birth  are  ferocious.  Now,  about  this 
date,  1,200  or  1,300  years  before  Jesus  Christ,  nations 
began  to  be  born  in  the  East.  Principles,  true  under 
the  patriarchal  ej)och,  could  no  longer  be  applied.* 
The  bases  of  justice  were  changed.  What  was 
true  in  the  days  of  pastoral  life  was  no  longer  so 
in  an  age  of  iron,  in  which  a man,  honest  according 
to  the  ancient  acceptation  of  the  term,  was  at  every 
instant  misunderstood  and  a victim. 

I do  not  know  if  Joshua  had  a greater  historical 
reality  than  Jacob.  But  of  a truth  the  tender- 
hearted Jacob  would  have  been  disgusted  had  he 
been  able  to  witness  many  of  the  acts  of  Joshua, 

* Five  hundred  years  later  this  was  the  cause  of  Job’s  deep 
despair. 


CONQUEST  OF  REGION  BEYOND  JORDAN.  199 


afterwards  reputed  to  be  glorious.  Jacob  on  his 
death-bed  is  supposed  to  have  cursed  Simeon  and 
Levi  for  their  misdeeds,  which,  as  compared  with  those 
of  the  conquest,  might  well  have  passed  for  moderate 
reprisals.* 

* Genesis,  ch.  xlix.,  v.  5,  7 ; cli.  xxxiv. 


CHAPTER  III. 


JUDAH  AND  BENJAMIN. 

The  passage  of  tlie  Jordan  certainly  took  place  oppo- 
site to  Jericho.*  The  Jordan  at  this  place  is  about 
as  wide  as  the  Thames  at  Windsor.  In  spring  it 
cannot  be  forded ; towards  the  end  of  summer  and 
in  autumn  it  is  little  more  than  two  feet  deep.  It  was 
easy  to  effect  a passage,  though  only  a few  would  cross 
over  at  the  same  time.  Since  the  establishment  of 
their  principal  camp  at  Arboth  Moab,  detachments 
more  or  less  considerable  of  Beni-Israel  incessantly 
passed  the  fords.  These  raids  merely  excited  the 
cupidity  of  their  brethren.  The  rich  oasis  of  Jericho, 
with  its  palm-trees  and  its  perfumes,  tempted  the 
tribes.  The  city  was  taken,  probably  by  treason,  and 
destroyed.  It  was  afterwards  rebuilt ; hut  no  doubt 
at  some  distance  from  where  the  Canaanite  city  stood. 

After  the  capture  of  Jericho,  the  central  camp  of 
Israel  was  removed  to  a place  called  Gilgal,  in  that 
well-watered  plain  which  stretches  from  the  foot  of 
the  mountain  to  the  mouth  of  the  Jordan.  Gilgal  or 
Galgalf  means  a heap  of  stones  dedicated  to  a religious 

* Second  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  xvii.,  v.  22,  24;  ck.  xix.,  v.  16, 
17,  39.  In  order  to  bring  in  bis  miracle,  tbe  narrator  of  Joshua  is 
obliged  to  suppose  circumstances  derived  from  tbe  season. 

t Equivalent  of  gal . 


JUDAH  AND  BENJAMIN. 


201 


purpose.  The  Gilgal  in  question  was  probably  a 
sacred  mound  of  the  Canaanites ; but  perhaps  it  owed 
its  origin  to  an  Israelitish  encampment,  or  it  may 
have  been  a mound  raised  for  sacrifices.  Afterwards 
it  was  supposed  that  in  these  megalithic  monuments 
had  been  found  a souvenir  of  the  miraculous  passage 
of  the  Jordan.*  The  puritans  saw  in  them  the  re- 
mains of  pagan  worship,  and  in  this  way  the  Gal- 
gal  of  Jericho  became  a religious  centre  greatly 
revered  by  some,  very  obnoxious  to  others, f so 
much  so  that  this  name  has  often  been  given  to 
various  localities.  However  that  may  be,  the  Gilgal 
of  Jordan  became  the  starting  point  for  a series  of 
expeditions  into  the  mountains.  It  is  a very  false 
idea^:  to  look  upon  Israel  at  this  moment  as  an 
organised  army,  having  only  a single  aim.  Nearly 
all  the  expeditions  were  undertaken  by  bands  of 
adventurers,  acting  on  their  own  account. § Some- 
times a band  was  composed  of  men  belonging  to 
various  tribes;  the  expedition  then  assumed  a kind 
of  federal  character;  but  these  operations  must 
have  been  rare,  and  they  produced  no  serious 
consequences  in  the  ulterior  institutions  of  the 
nation. 

An  expedition  which  appears  to  have  been  made 

* Joshua,  ch.  iv. 

f Judges,  ch.  iii.,  v.  19,  2G  ; Hosea,  ch.  iv.,  v.  15  ; ch.  ix ; 
v.  15  ; ch.  xii.,  v.  12 ; Amos,  ch.  iv.,  v.  4. 

\ This  is  owing  to  the  fictitious  form  of  the  story  in  the  Book  of 
Joshua. 

§ Numbers,  ch.  xxxii.,  v.  33 — 42. 


202  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


by  an  army  composed  of  the  men  of  all  the 
tribes  was  that  which  ended  in  the  destruction 
of  the  Canaanite  city  which  was  afterwards  called 
lia-Ai , “the  heap  of  ruins,”  near  Bethel.  The  real 
name  of  the  city  was  forgotten ; but  the  recol- 
lection of  the  skilful  strategems  attributed  to 
Joshua,  the  chief  who  personified  all  this  period 
of  military  raids,  was  preserved.  The  city,  like 
Jericho,  was  laid  under  a lierem  or  anathema.  Every 
one  was  killed,  and  the  king  was  nailed  to  a 
tree  until  the  evening.  The  execution  was  still 
more  atrocious  than  that  of  J ericho,  since  the 
town  was  never  rebuilt,  and  even  its  name  was  obli- 
terated. 

Terror  spread  through  the  country.  Many  tribes 
submitted  and  accepted  the  yoke  in  order  to  escape 
death.  The  division  of  the  Canaanite  tribes  aided  the 
invaders.  Every  town  followed  its  own  policy  without 
troubling  itself  about  others.  This  was  particularly 
the  case  in  the  confederation  of  the  Gibeonites.  This 
little  tribe,  of  Hivite  origin,*  possessed  four  or  five 
towns,  Gibeon,j*  Kefira,  Beeroth,  J Kiriath-Iearim.  § 
These  towns  had  no  kings,  and  consequently  no 
military  force ; they  accepted  the  new-comers  and 
concluded  a treaty  with  them,  which  reserved  all 
their  rights,  but  which  little  by  little  was  for- 

% Joshua,  ch.  xi.,  v.  19 
f To-day  El-Djib. 

\ To-day  Bireh. 

§ To-day  Abu-Gosch, 


JUDAH  AND  BENJAMIN.  203 

gotten,  or  rather  transformed  into  a tolerably  hard 
bondage.* * * § 

The  town  which  became  the  centre  of  this  history, 
and  which  perhaps  from  that  time  was  called  lerousa- 
laim , “ place  of  safety,”  and  Sion  (fortress),!  served 
as  fortress  to  a small  tribe  named  lebousim.  It  was  a 
fortified  summit  on  the  brink  of  a ravine,  much  deeper 
then  than  now.!  The  Jebusites’  city  was  built  on  the 
spot  now  occupied  by  the  haram , stretching  along  the 
crest  of  the  mountains  to  the  south.  A little  spring, 
called  Gilion,  § was  no  doubt  the  cause  of  the  selection 
of  this  locality,  which  afterwards  held  an  exceptional 
position  among  the  sacred  pilgrimages.  The  J ebusites 
considered  themselves  menaced  by  the  arrival  of  the 
Israelites.  ||  Their  king,  Adonisedek,^  especially,  was 
alarmed  at  the  alliance  which  the  Gibeonites  had 
formed  with  these  dangerous  strangers.  lie  opened 
negotiations  with  four  neighbouring  Amorite  kings, 
to  wit,  the  King  of  Hebron,  the  King  of  Jarmut,  the 
King  of  Lakisb,  the  King  of  Eglon,  and  the  five  kings 
laid  siege  to  Gibeon.  Joshua,  or  whoever  was  the 

* Joshua,  ch.  is.  The  bondage  was  not  complete  until  under 
Solomon. 

f See  Gesenius,  Thes.,  p.  1154.  The  meaning  of  Sion  is 
doubtful. 

| Josephus,  Ant.,  XX.,  ix.,  p.  7.  English  excavations  have 
shown  the  description  given  by  Josephus  to  have  been  true. 

§ Called  Fountain  of  the  Virgin. 

||  Joshua,  ch.  x. 

Adoni,  in  these  old  names,  is  always  followed  by  the  name  of 
a god,  as  Adoni-Iah,  Adoni-Ram,  Adonibezek,  who  seems  to  be  the 
game  person  as  Adonisedek. 


Q 


*04  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


chief  of  Israel,  had  still  his  camp  at  Gilgal,  near  the 
place  where  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  had  been  effected. 
The  Israelite  army  marched  in  a body  to  force  the  five 
kings  to  raise  the  siege  of  Gibeon.  A panic  seized  on 
the  Canaanite  army ; it  fled  towards  Bethoran  as  far 
as  Maqqeda.  Joshua  pursued  it,  cut  it  in  pieces, 
killed,  it  is  said,  the  five  kings  and  crucified  them.  A 
popular  song* * * §  celebrated  this  victory ; in  it  were  found 
these  two  lines : — 

Sun,  stand  thou  still  upon  Gibeon, 

And  thou,  moon,  in  the  valley  of  Ajalon. 

The  poet  wished  to  express  the  astonishment  of  nature 
at  the  prodigious  effort  of  the  Israelites.  This  rhetori- 
cal figure *]*  afterwards  gave  rise  to  some  curious  mis- 
takes. The  two  lines  were  placed  in  the  mouth  of 
Joshua,  and  in  changing  the  meaning  of  the  word, 
which  signifies  “stood  still  with  astonishment,” $ 
it  was  supposed  that  the  sun  really  stood  still  at  the 
order  of  Joshua. 

The  capture  of  Maqqeda,  of  Libna,  of  Lakish,  of 
Gezer,  of  Eglon,  took  place  rapidly  one  after  the  other. 
More  important  still  was  the  capture  of  Hebron  § and 
of  I)ebir,  which  were  the  capitals  of  the  southern 

* Preserved  in  the  lasher. 

f In  the  Song  of  Deborah  the  stars  fought  against  Sisera. 

t The  verb  damam  means  “ to  be  silent,  struck  with  terror.” 
The  mistake  is  created  by  the  substitution  of  arnad,  which  means, 
materially  speaking,  “ to  stop.” 

§ Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  9 — 15  ; Joshua,  ch.  x.,  v.  36  and  following; 
ch.  xii.,  v.  10 ; ch.  xv.,  v.  13  ; ch.  xx.,  v.  7. 


JUDAH  AND  BENJAMIN. 


205 


Canaanites,  who  seemed  to  have  possessed  a culture 
superior  to  that  of  the  rest  of  the  country.  It  was 
asserted  that  Hebron  was  given  as  a fief  to  a legendary 
hero  of  Judah,  to  a certain  Caleb,*  concerning  whom 
many  wonderful  tales  were  told.  In  reality  Caleb  ap- 
pears, like  Judah,  to  have  signified  a tribe,  that  of 
Calbiel  (dogs  of  God),f  specially  devoted  to  war,  and 
almost  synonymous  to  Judah. 

Thus  in  a series  of  successful  raids,  which  probably 
followed  each  other  rapidly,  the  whole  country  which 
afterwards  formed  that  of  Benjamin  and  Judah  was 
conquered.  As  these  two  tribes  always  acted  to- 
gether, and  as  the  first  conquest  just  corresponds  to 
their  frontiers,  we  are  led  to  believe  that  the  conquest 
itself  was  their  work.  Judah  was  one  of  the  principal 
divisions  of  Beni-Israel.  The  Benjamites  appear  to  us 
to  have  been  a smaller  division  of  youthful  warriors, 
bearing  a bad  reputation  for  morality,  { forming  a 
sort  of  body  of  light  infantry,  from  among  whom 
were  chosen  the  archers  and  slingers.  The  name, 
which  signifies  “ left-handed,”  was  derived  from  the 
habit  they  had  contracted  of  making  use  of  the 
left  instead  of  the  right  hand,  which  was  advan- 
tageous in  handling  the  sling.§  The  two  divisions, 

* Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  20. 

f Corpus  inscr.  semit.,  part  i.,  Nos.  49,  52,  86.  Caleb  is 
surely  the  short  for  Othoniel  is  nephew  of  Caleb  ; now 

Othoniel  means  Lion  of  God,  equivalent  to  Ariel. 

| Horrible  stories,  Judges,  ch.  xx.,  xxi. 

§ Judges,  ch.  iii.,  v.  15  ; ch.  xx.,  v.  16 ; First  Book  of 
Chronicles,  ch.  viii.,  v.  39;  ch.  xii.,  v.  2;  Second  Book  of 
Chronicles,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  7. 

Q 2 


206  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


at  any  rate,  acted  together  and  shared  the  fruit  of  the 
campaign. 

The  Benjamites,  far  less  numerous,  had  their  capital 
at  Gibeah,*  a league  north  of  Jerusalem.  They 
were  very  important  as  fighting  men ; but  they  had 
hardly  any  territory.  They  failed  in  several  attempts 
to  take  the  city  of  the  Jebusites.’j*  On  the  other  hand 
the  Gibeonites  lived  independent  beside  them,  and 
Gezer  was  never  taken. J The  other  tribes  were 
obliged  once  or  twice  to  punish  them  terribly,  which 
almost  led  to  their  destruction. § 

The  Judahites  occupied  in  a much  more  effective 
manner  the  territory  which  henceforth  bore  their 
name.  The  whole  of  Palestine  sloping  to  the  south 
of  Jerusalem  belonged  to  them,  but  they  were 
powerless  against  the  men  of  the  plain  along  the  sea 
coast,  who  possessed  iron  war-chariots. ||  The  Philistines 
also  formed  a barrier  to  the  west  which  they  did  not 
attempt  to  attack. 

* To-day  Toleil- el-foul.  Robinson,  i.,  pp.  577  and  following. 

f Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  21. 

I Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  29. 

§ Judges,  ch.  xx.,  xxi. 

||  Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  19. 

U Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  18,  is  surely  a mistake  or  an  interpolation. 


CHAPTER  IY. 


THE  CONQUEST  OE  MOUNT  EPHRAIM  AND  THE  NORTH. 

The  triumph  of  Benjamin  and  Judah  over  a great 
number  of  the  Canaanite  tribes  of  the  south  had  the 
most  important  consequences.  Under  the  protection 
of  the  Judahites,  and  always  aided  by  them,*  the 
Simeonites  took  possession  of  the  cities  to  the  extreme 
south,  Arad,  Beershebah,  all  the  celebrated  places  of 
the  last  patriarchal  days.  The  hostility  shown  by 
the  King  of  Sefat  to  the  Israelites  will  be  remembered. 
The  city  condemned  to  herein  was  annihilated ; it  was 
called  Horma .j*  Simeon  never  separated  itself  from 
Judah  ;J  a number  of  towns  are  represented  at  the 
same  time  as  Judahite  and  Simeonite;  the  limits  on 
the  south  between  Simeon  and  Edom  remained  unde- 
fined. These  regions  were  the  pastures  of  the 
nomads;  the  ownership  of  the  soil  hardly  existed. 
The  Amalekites  and  the  Shemites  § continued  to  live 
both  as  shepherds  and  brigands.  Simeon  conquered 
them;  he  reappears  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  then 

* Joshua,  ch.  xix.,  y.  9. 

t Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  17. 

X Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  2 and  following,  17. 

§ First  Book  of  Chronicles,  ch.  iv  , v.  40  and  following. 


208  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


liis  trace  vanishes,  absorbed  as  the  tribe  was  on  one 
side  by  Judah,  on  the  other  by  Edom. 

Dan,  also,  under  the  protection  of  Benjamin  and 
Judah,  found  a fixed  dwelling  place,  at  least  for  a 
time.  This  was  the  weakest  of  the  tribes  of  Israel. 
The  Danites  encamped  between  Jerusalem  and  the 
Mediterranean,  to  the  north  of  the  Philistines  and 
the  west  of  the  Gibeonites.*  They  never  succeeded 
in  subduing  the  Canaanites,  or  even  in  establishing 
themselves,  and  they  almost  all  migrated  to  the  north,  j* 
Aijalon,  Bethsemes,  Saalbim  remained  Canaanite,  and 
the  Ephraimites  were  afterwards  obliged  to  conquer 
them.J  Jaffa  always  remained  a purely  Phoenician 
city,  without  any  continuous  connection  with  the 
Israelites. 

The  Josephites  continued  to  hold  the  first  rank  in 
the  family  of  Israel.  We  have  seen  a fraction  of 
Manasseh,  the  Makirites,  conquer  Hor  and  Bataneh 
and  colonise  them.  The  other  Manassehites,  among 
whom  were  also  found  many  Makirites  and  Ephraim- 
ites, the  second  branch  of  Joseph,  established  them- 
selves in  the  country  which  was  afterwards  called 
Samaria.§  The  war  was  fierce  and  cruel : the 
Canaanites  of  the  plain,  especially  those  on  the  side 
of  Beth-Sean  and  Jezrael,  had  war  chariots  plated 

with  iron,  which  filled  with  fear  the  Bedouins  accus- 
7 r 

* Song  of  Deborah,  v.  17. 

t Joshua,  ch.  xix.,  v.  47,  48. 

J Judges,  ch.,  y.  34,  35. 

§ It  is  curious  that  the  Book  of  Joshua,  which  relates  the  con- 
quests of  Joshua,  does  not  mention  that  of  Samaria. 


CONQUEST  OF  MOUNT  EPHRAIM. 


209 


tomecl  to  fight  in  mountain  and  ravine.  The  clearing 
of  the  forests  occupied  by  the  Perizzites  and  the 
remainder  of  the  Anakim  was  also  a matter  of  difficulty 
and  danger.* 

The  valley  of  Sichem,  with  its  abundant  streams, 
seemed  marked  as  the  site  of  the  capital  of  this  splen- 
did country.  The  Ephraimites  built  a very  strong 
position  there,  perhaps  after  coming  to  terms  with  the 
Ilivites  of  the  district.  A great  many  legends  were 
circulated  to  show  that  Jacob,  wandering  in  this  region, 
had  acquired  a regular  claim  to  it, I that  Joseph  was 
buried  there, J that  the  patriarchs  had  made  of  this 
place  the  centre  of  the  worship  of  Iahveh.§  Sichem, 
in  fact,  was  always  the  religious  centre  of  the  Joseph- 
ites,  and  often  the  rallying  point  for  all  Israel,  before 
the  genius  of  this  singular  people  had  been  centred 
solely  on  Jerusalem. 

It  was  in  some  respects  the  same  as  regards  Shiloh. 
Shiloh  may  be  regarded  as  having  been  the  first  cen- 
tral point  of  the  whole  family  of  Israel. ||  As  soon  as 
the  great  temporary  camp  of  Gilgal  was  raised  the 
ark  was  established  there,  and  it  remained  there  for 
centuries. Shiloh  was,  in  this  way,  a common  city. 

* Joshua,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  14 — 18. 

f Genesis,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  18;  ch.  xxxiv.,  v.  2 ; ch.  xxxvii.,  v.  12 
and  following. 

| Joshua,  ch.  xxiv.,  v.  32  ; Genesis,  ch.  1.,  v.  25. 

§ Genesis,  ch.  xii.,  v.  7 ; ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  20  ; Joshua,  ch.  xxiv., 
v.  2G. 

||  Joshua,  ch.  xix.,  v.  9 and  following  ; ch.  xxi.,  v.  22  ; ch.  xxii., 
v.  9,  12. 

^1  Up  to  Eli  and  Samuel. 


2io  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


The  fine  stretch  of  plain  was  a favourable  place  of 
meeting  of  all  Israel. 

Bethel  was  also  a federal  point,  half-way  between 
the  Benjamites  and  the  Josephites.*  Its  conquest 
seems  to  have  been  accomplished  by  the  Josephites  by 
surprise. j*  As  we  have  said,  it  was  a place  of  great 
religious  importance.  The  God  of  Bethel  was  the  God 
of  the  whole  land  of  Palestine.  He  was  in  this  way 
one  of  the  elements  which  entered  into  the  composi- 
tion of  Iahveh.  The  old  Canaanite  sanctuary  of  Bethel 
(perhaps  a graduated  pyramid  like  the  substructure  of 
the  Assyrian  temples)  was  not  destroyed  until  a rather 
recent  period,  and  for  a long  time  proved  a formidable 
rival  to  Jerusalem. 

Issachar  had  the  ill-defined  territory  between  the 
house  of  Joseph  and  the  tribes  of  the  north.  The  large 
number  of  properties  running  the  one  into  the  other 
to  be  found  in  this  country  shows  that  the  division  of 
land  was  due  to  the  chances  of  conquest,  and  not  to 
a topographical  operation  executed  deliberately,  as  the 
Book  of  Joshua,  always  so  artificial,  would  have  us 
believe. 

The  Israelitish  occupation  in  these  regions  was  still 
more  incomplete  than  in  the  south.  Ghor  and  the 
plain  of  Jezrael  defended  themselves  with  their  iron 
chariots.  The  Phoenician  town  of  Dor  was  the  me- 
tropolis of  the  whole  shore  from  Carmel  to  Jaffa. 
The  coast  known  under  the  name  of  Haphoth-Dor,  and 

* Judges,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  81. 

f Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  22  and  following. 


CONQUEST  OF  MOUNT  EPHRAIM . 


21  I 


the  southern  slope  of  Carmel,*  remained  Phoenician. 
The  native  populations  of  Taanach,  Hegiddo,  Endor, 
Jibleam,  Peth-Sean,  and  all  the  right  bank  of  Jordan 
as  far  as  the  point  at  which  it  leaves  the  Lake  of 
Gonesareth,  resisted  Manasseh  and  Issacharf  victori- 
ously. The  whole  plain  of  Jezrael  also  escaped  them. 

Zabulon  and  Naphtali  took  what  was  afterwards 
called  the  “ circle  of  the  Gentiles,”  Galilee.^  Put 
their  occupation  was  in  reality  merely  a cohabitation 
with  the  previously  established  races.  The  towns  of 
Kitron  and  Xahalol  remained  Canaanite.§  Laish  or 
Lesem,  until  the  posterior  invasion  of  the  Danites,  was 
an  industrial  and  trading  town,  living  after  the  manner 
of  Sidon.j|  The  Canaanite  King  of  Ilazor  continued  to 
reign  to  the  west  of  Lake  Houle  and  along  the  upper 
banks  of  the  Jordan.  *[ 

Asher  possessed  still  less  effectively  the  country 
where  it  established  itself.  The  Phoenicians  always 
remained  masters  of  the  coast,  and  the  children  of 
Asher  were  never  more  than  tolerated  by  them.** 

The  establishment  of  Israel  in  the  countries  north  of 
Palestine  was  slow.ft  A long  time  passed  between  the 
passage  of  the  Jordan  and  the  day  when  Asher,  as  a 

* A piece  of  a Phoenician  inscription  was  found  there. 

f Joshua,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  11  and  following;  Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  27. 

J Isaiah,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  23. 

§ Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  80 — 32. 

||  Judges,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  7. 

U Joshua,  ch.  xi.,  v.  10. 

**  Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  31 ; ch.  v.,  v.  17. 

ft  The  campaign  of  Joshua  against  Jabin  is  a repetition  of  what 
is  related  in  the  Book  of  Judges,  ch.  iv. 


2i2  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL, 


tribe,  really  came  into  existence.  It  required,  in  fact, 
two  or  three  centuries  to  complete  this  conquest ; it  was 
a daily  struggle,  the  battle  of  the  iron  and  the  earthen 
pot.  The  element  the  least  capable  of  resistance  was 
broken.  The  Book  of  Joshua,  which  attributes  the 
conquest  of  the  whole  of  Palestine  to  one  great  captain, 
is  the  least  historical  of  the  books  of  the  Bible.  If  one 
excepts  the  taking  of  Jericho,  the  establishment  of  the 
Benjamites  at  Gibeah,  and  the  occupation  in  force  of 
several  towns  by  the  tribe  of  Judah,  the  conquests 
set  down  to  the  account  of  Joshua  (an  alleged  series 
of  overwhelming  victories  and  monstrous  extermina- 
tions), never  took  place.  By  some  successful  raids 
Israel  established  its  ascendency  over  the  little 
Canaanite  kings  of  the  south.  Some  towns  were 
effectually  occupied  together  with  their  territories,  and 
some  sections  of  tribes,  like  the  Gibeonites,  treated  with 
the  new-comers.  Lastly,  a great  number  of  towns,  like 
the  Ierousala'im  of  the  Jebusites,* * * §  like  Gezar,*|*  like 
Beth-Sean,  £ resisted  successfully.  The  two  popula- 
tions combined  with  each  other  like  a sponge  and 
water.  Their  language  was  the  same,  and  they  could 
have  had  little  difficulty  in  coming  to  an  under- 
standing^ The  religious  fanaticism  which  was  des- 
tined afterwards  to  render  the  Israelites  such  bad 
neighbours  as  yet  existed  only  in  a latent  condition. 

* Joshua,  ch.  xv.,v.  63. 

t Joshua,  ch.  xvi.,  v.  10. 

} Joshua,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  12,  13. 

§ Isaiah,  ch.  xix.,  v.  18. 


CONQUEST  OF  MOUNT  EPHRAIM. 


213 


In  order  to  understand  this  one  must  have  seen 
how  the  metualis  of  Syria,  who  are  the  new-comers, 
inasmuch  as  their  arrival  in  the  region  of  Lebanon  dates 
only  from  the  time  of  the  Crusades,  have  mixed  with 
the  other  races  of  the  country.  One  must  have  seen 
the  mixed  or  rather  double  villages,  where  two  popu- 
lations live  together  hating  and  yet  tolerating  one 
another.  Nearly  the  whole  of  Turkey  presents  a 
similar  spectacle.  It  is  impossible  to  draw  the  map 
of  such  countries.  A map  gives  one  only  the  well- 
defined  divisions  of  states  and  provinces.  Now,  in 
the  time  of  the  human  societies  to  wThich  I refer, 
there  was  no  such  a thing  as  a state.  There  was  the 
tribe  and  the  town.  The  tribe  and  the  town  represent 
only  an  enlarged  family.  None  of  those  powerful 
influences  which  trace  such  deep  lines  of  demarcation 
in  humanity  had  as  yet  made  themselves  felt. 

Among  excitable  and  capricious  peoples,  enmity 
is  not  often  very  durable,  and  the  foe  of  one  day 
often  became  the  ally  of  the  next.  In  the  districts 
where  the  Canaanites  and  the  Israelites  were  mixed, 
marriages  between  the  two  races  were  not  rare.* 
Such  and  such  a person  was  called  u the  son 
of  the  Canaanite  woman.” f The  mixture  of  reli- 
gions was  still  more  common.  There  was  no  religious 
hatred  between  the  populations.  The  Israelites, 
especially  those  in  the  mixed  country,  did  not 
scruple  to  worship  the  Baalims  and  the  Astartds  of 

* Judges,  cb.  iii.,  v.  6. 

f Exodus,  cb.  vi.,  v.  15. 


214-  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL 

the  place.*  Iahveli  appeared  only  during  federal 
manifestations,  and  these  were  not  frequent. 

Israel  was  not  yet  a nation ; it  was  an  agglomera- 
tion of  tribes  which  never  lost  sight  of  their  common 
origin.  And,  among  their  relations,  these  tribes  often 
included  sections  still  nomad,  with  whom  their  ances- 
tors had  been  on  terms  of  friendship  or  had  indulged 
in  neighbourly  intercourse.  This  especially  applies 
to  the  Edomite  tribes  and  the  Arabs  of  the  south  and 
the  east.  The  Kenites,  who  during  the  journey 
through  the  desert  had  rendered  service  to  the  fugi- 
tives, came  and  settled  near  Arad,  among  the  children 
of  Judah  and  of  Simeon. j*  It  is  supposed  to  have 
been  the  same  with  the  Edomite  tribe  of  Quenizzis.J 
The  Jerahmelites  and  other  remnants  of  patriarchal 
tribes,  who  continued  to  wander  through  the  deserts 
of  the  south,  affiliated  themselves  with  the  already 
strongly  coagulated  mass  of  Judah. § 

The  position  of  the  Israelitish  conquerors  was  very 
similar  to  that  of  the  Franks  in  the  north  of  France 
in  the  sixth  century.  Here  and  there  were  to  be  found 
small  but  compact  bodies  of  new  race,  but  more  fre- 
quently simple  military  fiefs,  not  to  speak  of  places  of 
refuge,  where  the  old  race  continued  to  live  as  of  yore. 
In  addition  to  all  this  there  existed  a sort  of  Dooms- 

* Judges,  cb.  iii.,  v.  6,  7. 

f Judges,  cb.  i.,  v.  16,  and  tbe  large  Hebrew  lexicons  at  word 
"3P- 

J Judges,  cb.  i.,  v.  12,  and  tbe  large  Hebrew  lexicons  at  words 
tap  and  nap. 

§ Lexicons  at  words  cm'  and  bSEm'- 


CONQUEST  OF  MOUNT  EPHRAIM. 


zi5 


day  Book  of  the  epoch,  a primitive  partition  among  the 
families  of  the  conquerors,  founded  upon  genealogies 
which  were  recorded  with  greater  care  as  time  went  on. 
The  immutability  of  territorial  property  was  laid  down 
in  principle  for  the  family.  In  default  of  male  children 
it  was  admitted  that  daughters  could  inherit  conquered 
lands.*  Soon  after  this  we  find  the  possession  of  the 
land  regarded  as  a gift  made  for  ever  by  Iahveh, 
who  endowed  his  own  people  by  taking  from  others 
what  they  had  planted  and  sown.j*  This  is  the 
eternal  principle  of  conquest,  which  considers  every 
kind  of  violence  as  legitimate,  and  which  has  the 
pretension  of  establishing  for  the  future  rights  which 
it  would  be  sacrilegious  to  attack.  And  the  gods 
always  appeared  to  consecrate  the  theft. 

In  those  years  of  conquest  a great  deal  of  heroism 
was  displayed.  We  are  so  accustomed  to  look  upon 
Israel  as  a holy  tribe  that  we  have  some  difficulty  in 
representing  to  ourselves  the  ancestors  of  Jeremiah, 
of  Ezra,  Jesus,  and  the  holy  Judah,  like  Achilles  and 
Ajax,  or  even  like  so  many  Imrulkais  and  Antars. 
And  yet  Israel  had  its  time  of  warlike  enthusiasm.  In 
its  long  struggles  with  Canaan  there  were  incidents 
and  adventures  without  number.  These  perilous  cam- 
paigns, the  ingenious  means  employed  to  capture 
towns,  these  stratagems  which  appear  to  us  ill- 
contrived,  but  which  were  then  considered  extremely 

* The  five  daughters  of  Zelophehad,  Numbers,  ch.  xxvii., 
xxxvi. 

t Deuteronomy,  ch.  vi.,  v.  10. 


2 1 6 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


subtle,  completed  the  epic  poem  commenced  beyond 
Jordan.  A thousand  tales,  for  the  most  part  legen- 
dary, celebrated  the  devices  of  Joshua,  the  daring  of 
Caleb,  the  capture  of  Jericho,  and  the  burning  of  Ai. 

All  this  formed  a veritable  epic  cycle,  the  branches 
of  which  were  preserved  in  oral  tradition  during  cen- 
turies. Each  town,  each  province,  had  its  legend. 
It  was  analogous  to  the  Fotouh , or  first  victories  of 
Islam,  which  afterwards  became  a pretext  for  all 
kinds  of  fables  and  exaggerations.*  It  was  especially 
analogous  to  the  ante-Islam  Arab  poetry.  The  custom 
of  the  Israelites,  as  of  the  ancient  Arabs,  was  upon 
each  solemn  or  characteristic  occasion,  esj)ecially  where 
battles  were  concerned,  to  strike,  metaphorically  speak- 
ing, a medal  by  means  of  an  ode  which  the  people  sung  in 
chorus,  and  which  remained  more  or  less  engraved  in 
the  memory  of  generations.  Memory  in  those  remote 
ages,  before  writing  was  known,  was  capable  of  miracles. 
These  songs  formed  an  unwritten  record,  resembling  in 
every  respect  the  Divans  of  the  Arab  tribes.  In  the 
tenth  century  b.c.,  the  said  songs  were  united  and  ex- 
plained by  little  tales  in  prose.  Hence  a book  like  the 
Ritab-el-AgMni  of  the  Arabs.  It  was  called  the  book 
of  the  Wars  of  Iahveh  *}*  or  the  book  of  Jasher.  Con- 
siderable portions  of  this  old  work  have  been  preserved 
in  more  recent  historical  compilations. 

These  epic  songs,  while  furnishing  matter  for  a 
sacred  book,  visibly  changed  their  character.  The 

* See  the  tales  of  the  false  Wokedi. 

f See  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  17 ; ch.  xxv.,  v.  28. 


CONQUEST  OF  MO UNT  EPHRAIM.  2 1 7 

supernatural  penetrated  through  the  heroic  history 
from  beginning  to  end.  The  little  song  about  the 
spring  which  the  chiefs  discovered  with  their  wands 
gave  rise  to  the  miracle  of  Moses  striking  the  rock 
with  his  rod.  The  rhetorical  figure  of  the  sun  of 
Gibeon  engendered  the  most  hyperbolic  of  marvels. 
The  passage  of  the  Jordan,  so  easy  to  effect,  was 
accomplished  with  the  superfluous  connivance  of  the 
river.  The  miraculous  establishment  of  Israel  in 
Canaan  became  a second  pillar  of  the  Jewish  dogma. 
Joshua  was  the  continuation  of  Moses.  The  cycle  of 
sacred  legends,  commencing  with  the  patriarchal  para- 
dise, and  finishing  with  the  partition  of  the  land  of 
Canaan  between  the  tribes,  was  finished.  But  it  took 
at  least  five  hundred  years,  it  required  the  action  of  a 
very  fanatical  religious  party,  before  the  necessary 
transformations  for  the  establishment  of  such  a histori- 
cal system  could  be  accomplished.  I cannot  do  better 
than  let  the  story  follow  its  natural  sequence. 


CHAPTER  V. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  MATERIALIST  lAIIVEIIISM. 

The  Israelite  conquest  of  Palestine  was  more  radi- 
cally affected  by  the  rank  accorded  to  Ialiveh  than  by 
anything  else.  The  adoption  of  this  god  hy  the  Bcni- 
Israol  dated  as  we  have  seen  from  the  most  ancient 
teachings  which  Israel  had  received  at  Ur-Casdim,  or 
rather  in  the  Padan-Aram.  But  in  the  ancient 
patriarchal  elohism  such  a name  could  never  enjoy  a 
great  popularity.  The  author  of  the  Book  of  Job,  who 
endeavours  to  describe  (lie  theological  ideal  of  that 
primitive  age,  avoids  employing  the  name  of  Ialiveh. 
One  of  the  ancient  biblical  stories  imitates  this 
example  up  to  the  time  of  Moses. 

AVc  have  seen  how  Israel’s  individual  belief  dawned 
upon  the  morrow  of  the  coming  out  of  Egypt.  National 
individualism  demands  a special  god.  From  that  mo- 
ment Ialiveh  became  the  protecting  deity  of  Israel, 
bound  to  declare  that  they  were  right,  even  when  they 
wero  wrong.  A victory  on  the  part  of  Israel  was  a 
victory  gained  by  Ialiveh  ; the  wars  of  Israel  were  tho 
wars  of  Iahveli.*  The  favours,  thanks  to  which  the 
people  of  Israel  thought  that  they  had  crossed  the  desert, 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  xviii.,  v.  17. 


DEVEL  OPMENT  OF  MA  TERIALIST I A H VEH ISM.  2 1 9 


were  the  favours  of  Iahveh.  Iahveh,  in  a word, 
was  exactly  to  Israel  what  Camos  was  to  Moab. 
Jephthah  admits  that  Camos  gave  Moab  to  the 
Moabities,  as  Iahveh  gave  Canaan  to  the  Israelites.* 
He  was  a national  god,  identified  with  the  nation, 
victorious  with  it,  vanquished  with  it.*j*  He  was  in 
some  sort  the  alter  ego , the  genius  of  the  nation  per- 
sonified, the  spirit  of  the  nation  in  the  sense  applied 
by  savages  to  the  word  [esprit).  It  is  easy  to  see 
how  completely  opposed  such  an  idea  is  from  Israel’s 
point  of  departure.  At  the  beginning,  the  elohim , 
wfith  no  individuality  of  their  own,  were  kneaded  more 
or  less  into  one  Elohim,  sole  master  of  the  world,  who, 
in  due  time,  became  the  only  God  of  the  Christians, 
the  Creator  and  Judge  of  the  universe. 

In  the  desert  Iahveh  was  still  but  a god  of  nomads, 
a god  without  land,  unable  to  dispose  of  an  acre.  How 
he  has  conquered  a country  which  he  has  bestowed 
on  his  servants.  It  is  unnecessary  to  know  if  he  be 
just  or  not;  he  favours  Israel,  that  is  sufficient.  Israel 
is  already  almost  a nation ; it  has  all  the  defects  of 
one.  The  essence  of  a nation  is  to  believe  that  the 
entire  world  exists  for  it,  that  God  thinks  of  nothing 
but  it.  As  long  as  the  old  spirit  of  Eloliism  lasted  that 
dangerous  name  of  Iahveh  was  a matter  of  no  conse- 
quence. El  and  Iahveh  were  two  kinds  of  synonyms 
which  were  indifferently  employed. Eut  everything 

* Judges,  cli.  xi.,  v.  24,  a slight  confusion. 

t Song  of  Deborah,  essentially  Iahvist  (Judges,  ch.  v.)»  See 
below,  pp.  255  and  following. 

| Schrader,  Die  Keilinschr.  lind  das  A.  T.,  pp.  23,  24. 


1 20  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


was  changed  when  Iahveh  became  a local,  patriotic, 
national  god.  From  that  time  he  was  ferocious.  This 
new  Iahveh  was  no  longer  the  antique  source  of 
strength  and  life  in  the  world.  He  was  a political 
slaughterer,  a god  who  showed  favour  to  a little  tribe 
yer  fas  et  nefas.  All  the  crimes  perpetrated  were 
about  to  be  ordered  in  the  name  of  Iahveh. 

Such  an  evolution  is  in  the  natural  order  of  things, 
and  we  have  seen  one  happen  in  our  days.  Germany, 
by  the  philosophy  to  which  it  has  given  birth,  by  the 
voice  of  its  men  of  genius,  had  more  successfully  pro- 
claimed than  any  other  race  the  absolute,  impersonal, 
and  supreme  nature  of  the  Divinity.  But,  when  she 
became  a nation,  she  was  led,  according  to  the  way  of  all 
flesh,  to  particularise  God.  The  Emperor  William  has 
on  several  occasions  spoken  of  unser  Gott , and  the  god 
of  the  Germans.  The  fact  is  that  nation  and  philosophy 
have  little  to  do  with  each  other.  Patriotism,  among 
other  meannesses,  has  the  pretension  of  having  a god  of 
its  own.  Ialiveli  elohenu , u Iahveh  our  god,”  said  the 
Israelite.  Unser  Gott  says  the  German.  A nation  is 
always  egotistical.  It  desires  that  the  God  of  heaven 
and  earth  should  think  of  no  other  interests  than  its 
own.  Under  one  name  or  under  another  it  creates  for 
itself  tutelary  divinities.  Christianity  offered  some 
difficulties  in  this  matter  through  the  severity  of  its 
dogma ; but  the  instincts  of  a nation  always  carry  the 
day.  Catholicism  has  escaped  from  the  orthodox  chains 
by  means  of  the  saints : St.  George,  St.  Denis,  St.  James 
of  Compostella,  are  really  on  a par  with  Camos  and 
Iahveh.  In  our  day  we  have  seen  the  Sacred  Heart 


DEVEL  OPMENT  OF  MA  TERIALIST IAHVEHISM.  2 2 1 


employed  in  a similar  manner.  Protestantism,  like 
Judaism,  has  no  other  resource,  under  similar  circum- 
stances, than  the  possessive  pronoun,  unser  Gott. 
Strange  contradiction,  fearful  blasphemy  ! God  is  the 
property  of  no  nation,  of  no  individual.  As  well  say, 
AId  absolute , my  infinite , my  supreme  Being . 

Iahveh  is  simply  the  confiscation,  sacrilegious  assur- 
edly, though  to  a certain  extent  logical,  of  the  power  of 
Elohim  to  the  profit  of  Israel.  The  great  W orkman  has 
only  one  care,  that  is  to  make  the  children  of  Israel 
triumph  over  their  enemies.  ITenccforth  God  has  a dis- 
tinctive name  in  Israel  as  he  has  in  Moab,  which  is  a 
great  decline  from  a religious  point  of  view.  A dis- 
tinctive name  is  the  negation  itself  of  the  divine  essence, 
but  a great  progress  in  a national  point  of  view  ! 

If  it  had  been  the  destiny  of  Israel  to  found  a nation 
there  would  have  been  no  reason  to  condemn  this  act 
of  simple  egoism  which  all  nations  have  committed  in 
their  origin.  But  the  national  tendency,  with  its 
special  god,  was  only  a fugitive  error  on  the  part  of 
Israel.  Those  terrible  abolitionists,  the  prophets,  the 
real  depositaries  of  the  instinct  of  the  race,  were 
destined  to  destroy  in  detail  this  cruel,  partial,  and 
rancorous  Iahveh,  and  to  return,  by  a series  of  more 
and  more  vigorous  efforts,  to  the  primitive  eloliism , to 
the  patriarchal  god,  to  the  El  of  the  large  tent,  to  the 
true  god.  The  history  of  Israel  may  be  summed  up 
in  a word : it  was  an  effort  continued  through  long 
ages  to  shake  off  the  false  god  Iahveh  and  to  return 
to  the  primitive  Elohim. 

R 2 


2 22  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


The  revolution  accomplished  by  the  prophets  did  not 
go  as  far  as  a change  of  expressions.  The  word  Iahveh 
was  too  deeply  rooted  in  the  nation  to  be  removed.  It 
was  retained.  The  idea,  universally  accepted,  that 
Iahveh  was  the  most  powerful  of  the  gods,  naturally 
led  people  to  speak  of  Iahveh  as  they  had  formerly 
spoken  of  El  or  Elohim.  Iahveh  thus  became  the 
supreme  being  who  made  and  governed  the  world. 
There  was  what  the  theologians  call  communicatio 
idiomatum.  The  words  changed  places,  and  in  time 
the  very  name  Iahveh  was  nearly  lost.  The  utter- 
ance of  it  was  forbidden,  and  it  was  replaced  by  the 
purely  deist  word  “ the  Lord.”  The  great  Christian 
propaganda,  as  I have  said,*  knew  only  this  word. 
The  personal  name  did  not  come  into  use  again  until 
the  seventeenth  century,  and  even  then  it  remained 
a scholarly  affectation,  which  did  net  penetrate 
seriously  into  the  religious  conscience  of  Christian 
nations. 

Gods  may  change  their  form,  but  they  always  retain 
the  mark  of  their  origin.  Iahveh,  through  all  his 
metamorphoses,  remained  essentially  a god  of  Fire. 
The  peal  of  thunder  is  his  voice.!  He  never  appears 
without  storm  and  earthquake  : | — 

Then  the  earth  shook  and  trembled;  the  foundations  also  of  the 
hills  moved  and  were  shaken,  because  he  was  wroth. 

There  went  out  smoke  out  of  his  nostrils,  and  fire  out  of  his  mouth 
devoured : coals  were  kindled  by  it. 


* See  above,  p.  151. 

t Exodus,  ch.  xix.,  v.  19;  Psalm  xxix.,  and  following. 
% Psalm  xviii.,  1-15. 


BE  VEL  OPM ENT  OF  MA  TER  I A L 1ST  I A HVEIIISM.  2 2 3 


He  bowed  the  heavens  also  and  came  down  ; and  darkness  was 
under  his  feet. 

* * * * * 

And  again* — 

The  voice  of  Iahveh  is  upon  the  waters:  the  God  of  glory 
thundereth  : Iahveh  is  upon  many  waters. 

***** 

Evep.  the  powerful  associations  which,  at  all  events 
since  the  crossing  of  the  desert,  connected  Iahveh  with 
the  mountains  of  Sinai  were  never  destroyed.  The 
principal  dwelling  of  Iahveh  was  always  there ; his 
customary  Olympus  was  in  Sinai.  There  he  resided  in 
the  midst  of  his  thunderbolts ; from  there  he  emerged 
with  terrible  splendour  when  his  people  stood  in  need 
of  him.  His  track,  in  such  cases,  was  always  the  same. 
He  came  from  the  south,  from  the  direction  of  Seir  and 
Paran ; he  shone  like  an  aurora  borealis ; the  earth 
trembled  ; it  was  the  signal  for  severe  judgments  about 
to  be  executed  on  the  nations  in  order  to  revenge 
wrongs  done  to  Israel. + 

We  have  seen  that  the  patriarchal  age  was  not  free 
from  superstition,  the  teraphim , and  the  little  gods  in 
wood,  in  clay,  and  in  metal.  These  teraphim  repre- 
sented special  gods,  not  the  only  El,  or  the  supreme 
Elohim.  Iahveh  retained  the  trace  of  his  peculiar 
origin ; being  long  represented  in  this  manner.  Our 
information  on  this  subject  is  very  incomplete,  the 
puritans  of  a later  age  having  suppressed  whatever 

* Psalm  xxix. 

f Song  of  Deborah  and  Psalm  lxviii. 


224  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


part  of  the  text  appeared  to  them  too  scandalous.  "But 
no  doubt  can  exist  that  in  ancient  times  Iahveh  was 
the  object  of  an  idolatrous  worship.  He  was  often 
represented  under  the  form  which  Egypt  had  rendered 
dear  to  the  least  enlightened  Israelites, * that  of  a 
golden  calf.f  Sometimes  he  was  given  the  attributes 
of  the  serpent ; X at  other  times  Iahveh  was  a plated 
image, § or  the  winged  disc  flanked  by  the  urceus , which 
is  so  common  in  Egypt,  and  which  is  never  missing  in 
a single  Phoenician  monument.  ||  I am  inclined  to 
believe  that  the  urim^\  of  the  symbols  employed  by 
the  Israelites'**  was  nothing  but  these  two  asps,  j*j* 
which  form  an  essential  part  in  the  great  Egyptian 
symbol  of  the  infinite.  Both  were  called  collectively 
ha-  Ourim  or  ha-  Our  dim ) the  two  ourim  ; or  else  one  was 
called  urim,  the  other  tliummim , a word  the  meaning  of 
which  when  thus  employed  completely  escapes  us. 

These  figurative  images  of  Iahveh  were  called  ephods^X 

* Exodus,  ch.  xxxii. ; Deuteronomy,  ch.  ix.,  v.  21. 

t First  Book  of  Kings,  ck.  xii. , v.  28,  29. 

\ The  nehustan,  or  brazen  serpent,  Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch. 
xviii.,  v.  4. 

§ Isaiah,  ch.  xxx.,  v.  22.  Real  meaning  of  “PEN  and 

||  Mission  de  Phenicie,  index,  words  globe  aile  and  urceus.  (asps). 

U D'msn.  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxviii.,  v.  6;  Numbers, 
ch.  xxvii.,  v.  21. 

**  Hebrew  seals,  vide  p.  126. 

ft  The  word  ovpaZos  is  Greek  and  cannot  be  used  in  the  argument. 
But  the  Egyptian  word  was  ms  or  mil?,  which  was  probably 
pronounced  Ordit  or  Ordi. 

tt  Judges,  ch.  viii.,  v.  27 ; ch.  xvii.,  v.  5 ; ch.  xviii.,  v.  14, 17, 18, 
20  ; First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxiii.,  v.  6,  9;  ch.  xxx.,  v.  7 ; Hosea, 
ch.  iii.,  v.  4 ; Isaiah,  ch.  xxx.,  v.  22.  The  passages  in  the  Book  of 
Samuel  seemed  too  broad  in  the  epoch  of  orthodox  Judaism.  They 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  MATERIALIST  TAHVEHISM.  225 


like  tlie  robes  of  tlie  Levites,  surplices  fastened  round 
the  waist  by  a belt,  which  the  officiating  priests  wore 
during  service.  It  is  not  known  how  this  double 
signification  arose.  The  idolatrous  object,  formerly 
known  under  the  name  of  ephod , was  of  metal  on  a 
wooden  frame.*  The  official  ephod,  if  we  may  so  term 
it,  was  in  the  ark,  always  at  the  service  of  the  levi,  or 
of  the  cohen;  but  it  was  sometimes  taken  out.  It 
could  not  have  been  large,  for  it  was  easily  carried  in 
the  hand.j*  Beside,  private  individuals  who  were 
sufficiently  rich  had  epliods  made  for  them  and  used 
them  for  their  personal  profit. £ 

The  ephod  in  fact,  in  addition  to  representing 
Iahveh,  had  a special  use,  that  of  being  employed  in 
divination  and  in  oracles.  In  certain  circles  of 
Israelitisli  opinions  Iahveh  was  a god  to  be  consulted 
in  order  to  know  the  future  and  to  obtain  useful  in- 
dications. The  patriarchal  El  was  also  consulted. 
He  placed  himself  in  communication  with  man  by 
means  of  dreams  and  prophets. § But  the  patriarchal 
age  had  nothing  which  resembled  a direct  consul- 
tation with  God.  Iahveh,  on  the  contrary,  was  a god 

were  toned  down  in  several  copies,  hence  our  present  Hebrew 
text.  The  Greek  translators  have  kept  to  the  ancient  version  in 
all  its  simplicity. 

* Judges,  ch.  viii.,  v.  27;  ch.  xviii.,  v.  18;  Isaiah,  ch.  xxx., 
v.  22. 

f Essential  passages,  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  3 and 
following  ; ch.  xxiii.,  v.  4 and  following. 

J Examples  of  Mikah  and  of  Gideon. 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxviii.,  v.  G ; Job,  ch.  xxxiii., 
v IS 


226  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


of  lots,  resembling  tbe  Temple  of  Fortune  at  Preneste, 
answering  yes  or  no  to  the  questions  put  to  him.* 

It  is  probable  that  the  idea  of  the  real  presence  of 
Iahveli  on  the  ark,  between  the  wings  of  two  cheru- 
bim j*  forming  a pedestal  and  serving  for  his  throne, 
had  been  in  existence  since  the  days  of  the  wandering 
in  the  desert.  To  this  ark  came  those  who  wanted  to 
consult  him.  £ The  only  form  of  process  then  known 
was  the  ordeal,  and  the  judgments  given  took  merely 
the  form  of  answers  to  those  who  came  to  question 
God.§  Nothing  important  was  done  without  the 
familiar  genius  of  the  tribe  being  consulted.  But 
nevertheless  matters  were  not  left  to  chance.  With 
the  Israelites,  as  with  the  Greeks,  the  oracles  were 
confided  to  the  care  of  the  wise  men.  What  we  should 
call  imposture  was  then  considered  merely  the  faithful 
interpretation  of  the  wishes  of  the  tutelary  deity. || 

When  the  tribes  were  formed  lahveh  was  above  all 
the  counsellor  of  the  nation.  The  servants  of  lahveh 
in  those  days  of  eclecticism  were  the  persons  who  had 
an  ephod  and  who  knew  how  to  turn  it  to  account. 
The  proper  names  into  which  that  of  lahveh  enters 
as  a component  part  are  to  be  found  hardly  any- 
where else  than  among  these  strange  persons.  Thus 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  x.,  v.  22. 

f First  Book  of  Samuel,  cli.  iv.,  v.  4 ; Second  Book  of  Samuel, 
ck.  vi.,  v.  2. 

J Exodus,  ck.  xxiii.,  v.  7 — 11. 

§ Exodus,  ck.  xviii.,  v.  15  and  following ; Numbers,  ck.  xxvii., 
v.  2,  5 and  following  ; Judges,  ck.  i.,  v.  1. 

||  Even  Mesa  undertook  notking  witkout  kaving  first  spoken  to 
Camos.  Inscr.,  lines  14,  32. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  MATERIALIST  IAHVEHISM.  227 


Gideon  and  his  family  appear  to  have  been  par- 
ticularly attached  to  the  practice  of  the  ephod.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  Mikah  or  Mika’iahou.*  Iahveh 
was  the  great  oracle  of  Israel.  Of  a truth  this  power- 
ful god  was  revered  by  all;  but  he  had  a special 
following  of  families  more  devoted  to  his  worship  than 
the  rest  of  the  nation.  These  first  saints  of  Iahveh  bore 
no  reputation  for  moral  purity  or  sober  piety.  They 
waited  on  the  idol  in  whose  name  they  returned 
answers,  which  were  received  with  such  profound  re- 
spect. There  is  nothing  to  prove  that  they  were  in  the 
least  superior  to  the  other  Levites  who  wandered 
through  the  country. 

* See  pp.  26G  and  following,  pp.  283  and  following. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


THE  ORACLE  OF  IAHVEH. 

How  were  these  consultations  of  Iahveh,  in  which  the 
most  sagacious  eye  could  certainly  not  yet  have  divined 
the  least  germ  of  the  future,  conducted  ? They  were 
conducted  often  by  lot,  or  by  choice,  which  was  ren- 
dered significative,*  or  by  fortuitous  indications,  by 
signs  which  the  priests  interpreted  as  they  liked. f 
In  the  event  of  urim%  being  employed  there  was  sure 
to  be  some  fraud  in  the  affair  on  the  part  of  the  Le- 
vites,  who  placed  themselves,  owing  to  their  subor- 
dinate situation,  in  the  hands  of  the  chiefs  of  the 
people.  As  in  the  sortes  prwnestince , some  skilful  trick 
was  played. § The  motive  power  remained  invisible, 

and  the  divine  tremolo  had  all  the  appearance  of  spon- 
taneous production. 

It  has  never  been  ascertained  by  what  mechanism 
the  oracle  was  rendered.  Some  have  supposed  that  a 
draught  or  a backgammon  board  was  used,  and  that  urim 
and  thummim  were  dice.  This  theory  is  not  inadmis- 
sible, firstly,  because  of  the  expression  “cast  lots” 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  xiv.,  v.  10. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  x.,  v.  20  and  following ; ck.  xiv., 
v.  86  and  following. 

I CHlNn  bstt?,  Numkers,  ck.  xxvii.,  v.  21. 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  xiv.,  v.  20. 


THE  ORACLE  OF  1AHVEH  zzg 

generally  used  for  these  kinds  of  oracles,*  and  secondly 
because  of  the  manner  of  interrogating  Iahveh  : “in 
such  a case  give  urim,  in  such  another  case  give 
thummim ,”j*  (which  answered  to  the  two  technical 
expressions  iasa,  “gone  out,”  and  nillcad , “was  kept 
in,”:}:)  to  announce  the  result.  Perhaps  the  two  asps 
of  the  winged  globe,  meaning,  one  yes , the  other  no, 
were  put  in  motion  by  means  of  a spring  concealed 
behind  the  disc.  It  was  naturally  the  priest  who 
worked  the  instrument  and  who  replied  to  the  ques- 
tions. It  is  remarkable  that  in  all  the  cases  of  con- 
sultation, the  answers  of  Iahveh  were  very  brief.  § 
The  question  was  asked  in  a sort  of  yea  or  nay  manner, 
which  hardly  allowed  for  any  hesitation. |[ 

An  expression,  however,  which  opens  up  another 
order  of  ideas  is  the  following  term  employed:  “ The 
affair  is  before  Iahveh,”  meaning  that  “the  affair 
is  accepted  by  Iahveh.  ”^[  It  would  seem  as  if  in 
this  method  of  consultation  Iahveh  turned  away  or  did 
not  turn  away  his  face  from  the  object  which  was 
placed  before  him,  and  that  it  was  concluded  from 
the  movement  of  the  idol  that  the  matter  would  or 
would  not  have  a happy  issue.  Egypt,  where  these 
aberrations  no  doubt  had  their  origin,  did  not  act 
otherwise.  The  judgments  of  God  by  yes  and  no  were, 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  41,  42. 
t Same  passage  corrected  by  the  Greek, 
t Familiarly  : “ The  affair  is  hung  up  before  Iahveh.” 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  37. 

||  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  41. 

H Judges,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  6. 


i3o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL 


at  this  epoch,  the  basis  of  Egyptian  life.*  The  god 
who  was  consulted  replied  by  moving  his  arms  or 
head,  and  even  by  word  of  mouth.' j*  These  conjuring 
tricks  were  performed  by  means  of  complicated 
mechanism. :j: 

We  see  that  nothing  is  more  obscure  than  the 
apparatus  by  means  of  which  Iahveh  was  consulted ; 
nothing  is  more  certain  than  the  fact  of  this  consulta- 
tion itself.  The  urim  and  the  thummim  were  considered 
as  the  property  and  as  the  title  of  honour  of  the  family 
of  Levi.§  In  every  difficulty  which  arose  the  au- 
thorities went  and  interrogated  the  oracle  of  the  ark, 
and  the  oracle  answered. ||  Political  difficulties  and 
civil  prosecutions  were  terminated  in  this  way.  This 
was  called  u interrogate  Iahveh,”  u come  and  search 
Iahveh,”  “ present  oneself  before  Iahveh,”  u draw  near 
to  Iahveh, ”5|  expressions  synonymous  to  u carry  the 
affair  before  Iahveh.”  Some  expressions  seem  to  in- 
dicate that  the  reply  of  Iahveh  was  sometimes  made  by 
word  of  mouth  ;**  but  the  date  of  these  expressions  is 
uncertain. 

* E.  Naville,  Inscr.  de  Pinodjem .,  iii.  (Paris,  1883),  p.  4. 

t Maspero,  Recueil  de  travaux,  t.  i.,  p.  157. 

J Hero  of  Alexandria,  Pneumatica  et  Automata,  in  the  Mathem. 
veteres  of  Thevenot,  pp.  167,  191,  192,  255,  266,  267,  273. 

§ Deuteronomy,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v.  8. 

||  Numbers,  ch.  xxvii.,  v.  21 ; Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  1 ; First  Book 
of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  20  ; ch.  xiv.,  v.  36 ; ch.  xxii.,  v.  10  ; ch. 
xxiii.,  v.  9;  ch.  xxviii.,  v.  6;  ch.  xxx.,  v.  7;  Second  Book  of 
Samuel,  ch.  ii.,  v.  1. 

If  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  36  ; Exodus,  ch.  xxi,  v.  6 ; 
ch.  xxii.,  v.  8. 

**  Joshua,  ch.  ix.,  v.  14. 


THE  ORACLE  OF  IAHVEH. 


23 1 

It  was  the  judgment  of  God,*  with  all  its  dangers; 
but  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  Israelites  applied  it,  as 
was  done  in  the  Middle  Ages,  in  criminal  cases.  Even 
limited  to  civil  cases  this  superstition  might  have  been 
terrible  in  its  consequences  had  it  not  been  confided  to 
the  chiefs  and  wise  men  of  the  nation,  who  dictated 
the  reply  of  the  priests,  and  consequently  that  of  urim 
and  thummim.  In  like  manner  the  oracle  of  Delphi 
was  always,  so  it  appears,  inspired  in  a way  to  favour 
the  interests  of  Greece.  What  the  material  and  sacer- 
dotal oracle,  which  played  heads  or  tails  with  the 
destinies  of  Israel,  obviously  threatened  was  prophecy. 
This  was  a most  dangerous  competition.  The  turn- 
stile was  about  to  annihilate  intelligence,  the  levi  was 
going  to  kill  the  nabi , the  official  oracle  was  going  to 
stifle  the  free  inspiration  of  Israel. 

A serious  abuse,  in  fact,  was  that  private  individuals 
who  were  rich  enough  to  have  an  ephodand  to  pay  for 
a Levite,  had  a domestic  oracle  of  which  they  made  use 
for  their  own  profit.  There  were  many  instances  of 
this  abuse,  f though  the  ark  kept  them  within  cer- 
tain limits.  The  ephod  of  the  ark  overshadowed 
the  other  ephods.  It  lost  a good  deal  of  its  own 
importance  by  the  construction  of  the  temple.  It  was 
out  of  the  question  to  allow  all  those  who  wished 
to  consult  Iahveh  to  enter  the  holy  of  holies.  At  a 
later  date  the  reform  of  Hezekiah  did  away  with  this 
barbarous  custom.  The  victory  of  the  spirit  of  pro- 

* Exodus,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  8. 

+ Judges,  cb.  xvii.,  xviii. 


232  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


phecy  was  complete.  One  of  its  effects  was,  without 
doubt,  to  throw  into  the  shade  this  remnant  of  the 
ancient  superstition  of  Israel. 

However,  did  the  ephod  entirely  disappear  under 
Hezekiah,  like  the  nehustan  ? That  is  not  probable,  for 
in  the  restored  worship  of  the  sixth  century  we  find 
something  which  can  only  be  considered  as  a trans- 
formation. The  most  characteristic  sign  of  the  rich 
and  elaborate  costume  devised  for  the  high  priest, 
was  a large  breast-plate  composed  of  twelve  precious 
stones,  on  which  were  engraved  the  names  of  the 
twelve  tribes  of  Israel.  Without  explaining  matters 
as  clearly  as  it  might  do,  holy  writ  confounds  this 
breast-plate  with  the  ancient  ephod,  and  places  there, 
in  a rather  obscure  manner,  the  urim  and  thummim. 
Perhaps  the  upper  part  of  the  breast-plate  contained 
the  winged  disc  and  the  urceus  * This  is  what  was 
called  the  oracle. f The  belief  that  Aaron  wore  the 
oracle  of  Israel  on  his  heart  gave  general  satis- 
faction.! This  had  no  longer  a practical  meaning, 
and  offered  no  danger.  The  old  sacrament  was 
nearly  worn  out,  materialised,  and  converted  into  an 
ornament  for  the  cope  jewel.  The  priesthood  had 
suppressed  it  by  monopolising  it.§  Eeligious  imagi- 
nation knows  no  bounds.  This  breast-plate  oracle 
gave  rise  to  the  belief  that  the  spirit  of  prophecy  was 

* See  p.  229. 

t Aoyiov  or  Aoyiaoi/  of  the  Greek  translators.  See  Gesenius  as 
regards  the  expression  ECttfCn  'jti’n. 

X Exodus,  ch.  xxviii.,  v.  29. 

§ Numbers,  ch.  xxvii.,  v.  21. 


THE  ORACLE  OF  I AH  V EH. 


233 


plated,  if  we  may  so  express  it,  on  the  breast  of  the 
high  priest.  Hence  the  popular  idea  that  the  high 
priest  was  a prophet  once  a year.* 

Thus  urim  and  thummim  came  to  an  obscure  end. 
In  the  fifth  century  b.c.  it  was  not  clearly  known 
what  the  ephod , urim , and  thummim  were. 

In  questions  which  could  not  be  solved,  the  persons 
interested  were  put  off  until  a priest  could  come  to 
judge  by  urim  and  thummim .j*  There  was  a sort  of 
irony  in  this,  as  if  one  were  to  say  now,  u That  will 
not  be  clear  until  the  judgment  of  God  is  known.” 
The  latest  editors  of  the  historical  books  effaced  many 
traces  of  ancient  materialism.  The  Alexandrian  trans- 
lators of  the  Bible,  well  acquainted  with  Egyptian 
customs,  were  very  much  struck  with  the  little 
backgammon-board  of  precious  stones  which  the  chief 
judge  in  Egypt  wore  round  his  neck,  hanging  down 
his  breast,  and  which  in  the  era  of  the  Ptolemies  was 
called  Alethici.%  They  rendered  urim  and  thummim 
by  AijXwais  real  aXijOeia.  They  assumed  them  to  have  a 
kind  of  allegorical  meaning.  They  confused  the  machine 
for  delivering  oracles  with  the  backgammon-board  of 
precious  stones  hung  on  the  breast  of  the  priest. 

All  analogy,  it  will  be  seen,  leads  us  to  look  for  the 
origin  of  urim  and  thummim  to  Egypt.  But  it  is 
not  necessary  on  this  account  to  suppose  that  they 
were  borrowed  direct.  The  influence  of  Egypt  was 

* St.  John,  ch.  xi.,  v.  49 — 51. 
t Ezra,  ch.  ii.,  v.  G3  ; Nehemiah,  ch.  vii. , v.  65 
J Diod.  Sic.,  i.,  pp.  48,  75. 


234  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

felt  throughout  the  whole  of  Phoenicia.  The  ephod  of 
Israel  may  have  been  copied  from  the  divining 
utensils  of  the  Phoenicians  and  the  Philistines,  who 
may  themselves  have  copied  them  from  Egypt.  These 
superstitions  are,  unfortunately,  only  too  easily  handed 
down  from  one  people  to  another.  TJrim  and  thummim 
were  therefore  to  Israel  what  the  Xaaba  was  to 
Islam.  The  Kaaba  was  a remnant  of  paganism  which 
Mahomet  did  not  dare  to  abolish.  Nor  did  the 
Jewish  monotheism  dare  to  do  away  entirely  with 
the  old  ephod ; but  it  subordinated  it  and  submerged 
it,  so  to  speak,  in  the  midst  of  the  symbols  of  a 
triumphant  monotheism. 

The  god-oracle  was  at  the  same  time  the  god  of 
vows  and  oaths,*  especially  of  terrible  oaths,  where 
people  swore  extermination  and  vengeance  as  if  to 
fortify  themselves  against  any  temptation  to  show 
pity.  Every  oath  taken  to  Iahveh  meant  a kind  of 
vow  ; Iahveh  revenged  himself,  if  he  was  called  upon 
in  vain ; then  his  oracle  was  silent ; and  the  silence  of 
the  ephod  was  regarded  as  a sign  of  wrath  on  the  part 
of  Iahveh  ;j*  the  criterion  of  truth  no  longer  existed. 
Iahveh  was  essentially  a god  of  truth.  He  could  not 
suffer  his  name  to  cloak  the  slightest  inaccuracy. 
This  redoubtable  Zeus  OrJcios  saw  nothing  but  the 
material  fact ; degrees,  extenuating  circumstances,  had 
no  weight  with  him.  He  was  ferocious  when  robbed 

* Exodus,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  10. 

f First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  36  and  following,  according 
to  Greek. 


THE  ORACLE  OF  I A II  JELL 


*35 


of  the  quantity  of  blood  which  was  due  to  him. 
Human  sacrifices  were  much  more  common  in  Israel 
during  the  period  of  the  judges  and  the  first  kings 
than  during  the  age  of  the  patriarchs.  Old  father 
Abraham,  filled  with  justice,  humanity,  and  kindness, 
was  succeeded  by  a severe,  inflexible  god. 

Morality,  in  its  absolute  sense  as  superior  to  gods 
and  men,  did  not  exist.  The  personal  tie  created 
between  God  and  man  by  the  vow  and  the  oath 
replaced  everything.  It  in  some  way  resembled  those 
conditions  which  children,  in  their  games,  make  among 
themselves.  Such  and  such  things  were  forbidden, 
not  because  they  were  bad  in  themselves,  but  because 
they  were  tabooed  in  a way  which  removed  them  from 
the  world  below  and  surrounded  them  with  an  atmo- 
sphere of  terror.*  A deep  feeling  of  rancour  appeared 
to  be  the  prevailing  sentiment  of  this  god,  too 
capricious  to  be  a just  judge. 

What  was  the  popular  conception,  at  this  epoch,  of 
the  relation  between  these  two  divine  names,  Ialiveh 
and  Elokim  ? It  would  be  difficult  to  say  with  cer- 
tainty. It  is  probable  that  the  use  of  the  word 
Iahveh  gained  ground  every  day.f  Eloliim,  however, 
was  preferred  in  proverbs,  in  the  maxims  of  parabolic 
philosophy,  which  doubtless  existed  already  in  a 
rudimentary  fashion.  The  word  Iahveh  was  never 
employed  in  this  literature,  because  it  related  to  an 
ideal  anterior  to  Iahvehism.  Sabaoth  was  seldom 

* Joshua,  ch.  vi.,  v.  26,  27. 
t The  Song  of  Deborah,  Judges,  ch.  v. 

S 


235  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

employed.  Often  the  two  words  Sabaoth  and  EloJiim 
were  added  to  Ialiveh,  in  this  form  : Iahveh- Sabaoth ,* 
la/iveh-Elohim .f  The  expression  Adona'i- Ialweli,  “my 
lord  Iahveh,”  was  merely  respectful.  The  expression 
Iahveh  elohe  Israel , “ Iahveh  god  of  Israel,”  expressed 
the  truth.  Eloliim  and  Sabaoth  were  for  the  whole 
human  race ; Iahveh  was  for  Israel  only.  To  he  sure 
on  the  other  side  of  the  Arnon  they  likewise  said 
Camos  elolie  Moab , “ Camos  god  of  Moab.” 

The  rude  analogies  upon  which  primitive  theology 
was  constructed  naturally  led  to  the  formation  of  a 
celestial  court  of  Iahveh.  The  sons  of  God  were  as- 
cribed to  him  4 He  had  a general-in-chief  of  his 
armies,  § a sar-saba , a seraskier,  who  was  sometimes 
met,  a naked  sword  in  his  hand,  and  who  was 
approached  in  trembling.  Far  more  important  still 
was  the  angel  or  messenger  (i) lalealc)  charged  at  first 
to  carry  the  orders  of  Iahveh,  and  who  soon  became 
grand  vizier,  and  shared  the  powers  of  Iahveh.  From 
a very  early  age,  in  fact,  Iahveh  had  at  his  side  a sort 
of  double-self,  who  was  ca  led  MaleaJc- Iahveh  ; it  was 
like  his  counterpart,  his  alter  ego.  The  Phoenician  re- 
ligion presents  ideas  nearly  similar.  The  visage  of 
the  god  is  distinct  from  the  god  himself. ||  What  is 
more,  the  MaleaJc- Iahveh  of  the  Hebrews  may  well  have 

* Second  Book  of  Samuel,  eh.  vi.,  v.  2 ; ck.  vii.,  v.  27. 

f Second  Book  of  Samuel s eh.  vii.,  v.  22,  25. 

| Job,  ck.  i.,  v.  6 ; ck.  ii.,  v.  1. 

§ Joskua,  ck.  v.,  v.  14. 

||  so  frequent  in  Carthage  ; the  abs  of  the  Aramaic 

inscriptions. 


THE  ORACLE  OF  I AHVEH. 


237 


his  counterpart  in  the  Malealc-Baal , the  Malealc-  Astoret 
of  the  Phoenician  epigraphy.* * * §  It  is  by  no  means  sure 
that  the  Moloch  or  Milk  of  the  Canaanite  religion 
does  not  owe  its  origin  to  a similar  source,  *j*  which 
appears  to  have  in  Egyptian  theology  its  origin  and 
its  explanation.  According  to  this  theology,  the  in- 
fluence of  which  was  so  great  in  the  Canaanite  region, 
the  double  of  the  god  wa*  the  god  himself.  One  finds 
at  Thebes  invocations  to  the  double  of  Ammon.  Else- 
where the  double  of  Chons  figures  instead  of  Chons.  £ 

The  Malealc- Iahveh  is  often  only  “a  man  of  God”§ 
sent  by  Iahveh  for  some  definite  object.  In  most  cases, 
however,  the  Malealc  is  not  to  be  distinguished  from 
Iahveh  himself. ||  At  a more  recent  epoch  this  gave 

rise  to  a very  singular  abuse.  Some  pietists  of  Judah 
found  fault  with  certain  passages  of  the  ancient  books 
in  which  Iahveh  acted  as  a man  and  compromised  him- 
self in  vulgar  adventures.  They  made  a rule,  in  such 
cases,  of  substituting  Malealc- Iahveh  for  Iahveh.  The 
angel  of  Iahveh  was  the  divine  agent  in  all  cases  where 
Iahveh  was  brought  into  contact  with  man. 

The  Samaritans  and  the  Jews  of  Alexandria, 
Josephus  and  the  Judeo-Christians,  exaggerated  still 
more  this  theological  mania.  They  managed  in  nearly 

* Corpus  inscr.  seinit.,  part  i.,  Nos.  8,  123,  147,  149,  195,  380. 

t “fbfi  perhaps  for  “fsba,  as  elL  in  Arabic  for  especially  in 
the  Koran. 

| Champollion,  Monum.,  t.  i.,  pi.  lxxxiv.  ; Maspero  in  the 
Recucil,  t.  i.,  p.  156. 

§ Vision  of  Manoah,  Judges,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  2 and  following. 

j|  Genesis,  ch.  xvi.,  v.  7,  13  and  following. 

s 2 


23S  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


all  the  old  narratives  to  substitute  for  God  this  hind 
of  second  person  of  God.  The  u name  ” played  a simi- 
lar part.  The  name  of  the  person  was  the  person 
himself.* * * §  The  word  shem  became  thus  an  equivalent 
for  Iahveh,  f especially  among  the  Samaritans. $ One 
easily  perceives  how  the  theories  of  the  Word  and  of 
the  Trinity  sprang  from  this  sort  of  language.  It 
was  the  commencement  of  that  hypostatic  theology 
into  which  Semitic  monotheism  plunged  in  quest  of 
the  variety  and  the  life  which  were  denied  to  it  for 
want  of  a mythology. § 

Sometimes  these  hypostatic  divisions  went  still  fur- 
ther : Iahveh  appeared  inseparable  from  his  Jiaberim 
or  maleakim, ||  and  as  one  of  them.  While  travelling, 
especially,  he  liked  to  shake  off  his  other  self,  allowing 
himself  to  be  received,  lodged,  and  fed.  To  those  who 
found  it  strange  that  Iahveh  should  thus  eat  and 
drink,  the  answer  was  that  it  was  not  Iahveh  but  his 
maleakim.  The  real  form  of  Iahveh,  in  fact,  was 
never  human.  He  was  a kind  of  dragon,  roaring 
thunder,  vomiting  flame,  causing  the  tempest  to  howl ; 

* Exodus,  ch.  xxiii.,  v.  21  ; First  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  iii. , v. 
2 ; ch.  viii.,  v.  17,  20,  29 ; Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  iii.,  v.  27  ; 
Isaiah,  ch.  xxx.,  v.  27 ; Psalm  liv.,  and  frequently  in  other 
Psalms. 

t Gesenius,  Thes.,  p.  1433.  Compare  the  name  for 

STnn\  perhaps  Etiru  for  rma. 

| The  Samaritans  always  substituted  HE'D  for  the  word  niiT. 
The  Jews  also  wrote  for  nirP. 

§ See  Origines  du  Christianisme , i.,  p.  257  and  following;  v.f 
p.  415  ; vi.,  p.  64  and  following. 

||  Genesis,  ch.,  xix.,  v.  1. 


THE  ORACLE  OF  IAHVEH 


239 


he  was  the  universal  ronah  under  a globated  form,  a 
kind  of  condensed  electric  mass.  Iahveli  acted  like  a 
universal  agent.  He  ate  the  sacrifice  at  the  moment 
that  the  flame  devoured  it.  In  that  case  the  flame  was 
often  spontaneous ; it  licked  up  the  morsels  of  the  vic- 
tims stretched  upon  the  rock  and  made  them  disappear. 
Sometimes  two  large  nostrils  were  dilated  over  the 
smoke  of  the  sacrifice  in  order  to  inhale  it.* * * §  On  other 
occasions  the  god  was  seen  to  ascend  from  the  flame  of 
the  sacrifice ; he  disappeared  in  the  tongues  of  fire 
which  leaped  from  the  altar.*]*  Then  man  had  in 
reality  beheld  Iahveh  and  was  sure  to  die.J 

But  it  was  not  rare  for  Iahveh  when  he  wished  to 
reveal  himself  to  men  to  employ  disguises.  He  became 
Proteus  or  Vertumnus.  Then  he  was  peculiarly  bel- 
ligerent. He  was  to  be  met  with  in  the  deserted 
parts  of  the  country  which  he  preferred ; he  attempted 
to  kill  you,  he  thirsted  after  your  blood. § Or  else  one 
fancied  that  one  was  struggling  with  him  in  a night- 
mare. One  perspired  and  exhausted  oneself  against  an 
unknown  force.  This  lasted  all  night  long  until  dawn 
broke.  Then  one  awoke  enervated,  having  struggled 
against  Iahveh  or  his  Maleak.\\  This  is  what  happened 
to  Jacob,  and  hence  no  doubt  the  expression  Abir  Jakob , 

* Genesis,  ch.  viii.,  v.  21. 

t Judges,  cb.  xiii.,  v.  15  and  following. 

| Judges,  cb.  vi.,  v.  22  and  following;  cb.  xiii.,  v.  22  and 
following. 

§ Exodus,  cb.  iv.,  v.  21  and  following. 

||  Genesis,  cb.  xxxii.,  xxxv. 


24o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


“the  strength  of  Jacob,  or  Abir  Israel ,*  to  indicate 
God.  The  M aleak  was  the  fiction  by  which  the  shape- 
less or  deformed  being  entered  into  the  order  of 
formed  and  visible  beings.  The  general  rule  was, 
when  the  presence  of  Maleak  was  suspected,  to  furnish 
him  with  a copious  repast; f 

In  general  Iahveh  was  impalpable,  invisible.  It 
was  difficult,  under  the  caprices  of  this  strange  electri- 
forrn  agent  to  foresee  that  Iahveh  would  one  day 
become  a just  God.  The  Iahveh  of  the  time  of  the 
Judges  had  scarcely  anything  of  the  moral  god  about 
him.  He  chose  certain  people  ; he  loved  certain  men  ; 
his  preferences  could  not  be  explained.  He  wTas  very 
inferior  to  the  ancient  Eloliim.  If  we  compare  the 
religious  condition  of  the  nomad  children  of  Jacob  or 
of  Isaac  with  that  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  at  the  epoch 
we  have  reached,  the  deterioration  is  great.  It  re- 
quired centuries  of  progress  for  Iahveh  to  love  good, 
to  hate  evil,  and  to  become  a universal  god.  Let  us 
put  our  trust  in  the  genius  of  Israel,  in  the  persistent 
recollections  of  the  age  of  the  patriarchs,  and  the  latent 
action  of  the  pious  examples  of  Pater-  Orchamus.  Let 
us  put  our  trust  above  all  in  humanity,  which  always 
gains  its  end,  has  the  power  to  transform  what  it 
loves,  and  eventually  succeeds,  by  dint  of  beating  the 
air,  in  extracting  from  the  senseless  urim  and  thummim 
some  atom  of  justice  and  of  truth. 

*.  Genesis,  ch.  xlix.,  v.  24 ; Isaiah,  ch.  i.,  v.  44. 

t Abrabam,  Gideon. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


THE  JUDGES. 

If,  upon  their  arrival  on  the  hanks  of  the  Jordan,  among 
the  Arboth-Moab , at  Jericho,  the  Israelites  had  been  as 
dense  in  numbers  as  the  Moabites  and  the  Edomites, 
they  would  certainly  have  imitated  those  nations,  who, 
having  obtained  fixed  dwelling-places,  chose  kings 
for  themselves.  But  the  situation  of  Israel  was 
quite  different.  The  tribes  made  isolated  efforts 
to  gain  a position  in  the  midst  of  the  Canaanites. 
The  wars  of  Judah,  of  Ephraim,  and  Manasseh 
were  undertaken  without  any  unity  of  action.  The 
want  of  a single  chief  was  greatly  felt.  Religious 
centralisation  did  not  exist.  They  still  lived  on 
what  remained  of  the  patriarchal  elohism,  greatly 
adulterated  by  the  superstitions  of  the  worship 
of  Iahveh,  especially  by  an  abuse  of  the  oracles  of 
the  ephod. 

The  ark  had  no  fixed  resting-place.  From  Gilgal 
it  was  carried  to  Bethel,*  a town  already  holy  and 
whose  holiness  it  increased;  then  to  Shiloh,  where 
it  appears  to  have  remained  a long  time.  Shiloh, 
owing  to  its  central  position,  was  nearly  becoming  a 

* Judges,  ch.  x.,  v.  26  and  following. 


2+2  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

capital  for  Israel.*  But  there  was  no  scruple  felt 
in  moving  this  sacred  piece  of  furniture ; it  was 
like  the  carroccio  of  the  Italian  towns  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  the  palladium  of  the  nation.  The  ark 
was  taken  campaigning  at  the  risk  of  losing  it. 
Often  it  was  placed  under  a tent ; hut  after  the  end 
of  their  nomad  life  this  mode  of  shelter  appeared 
insufficient.  It  was  generally  lodged  in  the  house  of 
some  person  of  rank,  who  thus  became  its  guardian. 
The  idea  of  constructing  a special  house  for  the  ark 
ought  to  have  occurred  to  the  tribes,  hut  they  were  so 
unsettled,  so  poor,  so  precariously  established  in  the 
country,  that  no  one  mooted  this  idea.  The  establish- 
ment of  the  ark,  with  its  ephod  and  its  divining  appa- 
ratus, nevertheless  formed  a kind  of  temple,  which 
was  called  bet  ha-elohim , “ house  of  God.”*f* 

The  ark,  besides,  in  the  olden  time,  did  not  play 
the  exclusive  part  attributed  to  it.  It  gave  notoriety 
to  the  place  where  it  was,  but  it  did  not  over- 
shadow the  opposition  made  by  other  places  in  the 
name  of  their  private  interests.  We  shall  see  Ma- 
nasseh,  Gilead,  and  Dan  creating  places  where  Iahveh 
could  be  consulted  in  duly  established  form.  Private 
epliods  were  set  up  and  obtained  great  success.  It 
required,  however,  no  great  sagacity  to  see  that  the 
ark  was  the  centre  of  the  nation  and  the  generating 
point  of  monotheism.  The  ark  of  Israel  was  a thing 

* Frequently  mentioned  in  Judges,  Joshua,  and  First  Book  of 
Samuel. 

t Judges,  ck.  xviii.,  v.  31. 


THE  JUDGES. 


243 


unique  in  its  essence.  It  never  occurred  to  anyone 
to  create  a second  ark.  Even  when  Jerusalem  mono- 
polised the  ark,  the  kingdom  of  Israel  made  other 
sanctuaries,  but  never  a private  ark.  The  talis- 
man which  they  called  nehustan  was  unique  and 
the  most  undoubted  heritage  of  Moses;  the  ark, 
evidently,  was  supposed  to  date  back  to  Moses.  It 
consequently  could  have  no  double,  which  privilege 
was  not  shared  by  the  ephod. 

The  persons  in  charge  of  the  ark  were  limited  to 
some  Levites  skilled  in  the  manipulation  of  the 
ephod;  the  sacrifices  continued  to  be  made  by  the 
heads  of  families  upon  improvised  altars*  of  stone  or 
turf.  These  sacrifices  were  offered  up  no  matter 
where,  according  to  circumstances.  The  high  places 
of  the  former  inhabitants  were  preferred  by  the 
children  of  Israel,  f The  contagion  especially  of  the 
Canaanite  sanctuaries  was  strongly  felt.  Baal  and 
Asera  were  adored  in  various  places.J  The  evil 
Moabite  worship  of  Baal-Phegor,  a kind  of  priapism, 
seduced  the  least  pure.§  The  Baal-Berith  of  Sichem 
was  almost  as  much  respected  by  the  Israelites  as 
their  own  Iahveh.||  The  name  of  Baal,  by  which  the 
Canaanites  delighted  to  style  their  god,  inspired  no 
feeling  of  repulsion  at  this  epoch.  In  the  same 

* Judges,  ch.  ii.,  v.  5 ; ch.  xxi.,  v.  2 and  following ; Exodus, 
ch.  xx.,  v.  24,  26. 

t Deuteronomy,  ch.  xii.,  v.  29  and  following. 

t Judges,  ch.  ii.,  v.  13  and  following. 

§ Numbers,  ch.  xxv. 

||  Judges,  ch.  viii.,  v.  83  ; ch.  ix.,  v.  27. 


*++  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

family  are  found  Baal  and  Iahveh  the  one  used  as  often 
as  the  other  in  the  composition  of  proper  names.* 

The  nobis  in  Israel,  at  that  remote  epoch,  enjoyed  no 
importance.  The  urim  and  thummim  were  too  power- 
ful rivals  for  them.  The  religious  confusion  may  he 
said  to  have  been  as  complete  as  possible.  A few  pro- 
phetic individualities  appear  to  us,  it  is  true,  greatly 
attached  to  the  worship  of  Iahveh.  Deborah,  if  the 
text  of  her  song  has  not  been  tampered  with,  was  im- 
pressed with  the  idea  that  the  misfortunes  of  the  people, 
above  all  the  wars,  were  the  consequences  of  infidelity 
and  the  hankering  after  strange  gods.f  But  the  pas- 
sage in  question  appears  to  have  been  altered. :j:  The 
doings  of  Gideon,  of  Mikah.  of  the  Gileadites,  of  the 
Danites  of  the  north,  show  us  how  loose  and  how  ill- 
regulated  religion  then  was.  Most  of  the  tribes  held 
Iahveh  to  be  the  tutelary  deity  of  Israel ; Iahveh  was 
almost  the  only  god  from  whom  oracles  were  demanded; 
but  they  gave  him  for  companions  the  gods  of  the 
country ; they  called  upon  Baal  and  Milik  at  the  same 
time  that  they  called  upon  him.  They  adored  this 
god.  already  irritable  and  jealous,  upon  the  open-air 
altars  defiled  by  the  natives  ; they  associated  him  with 
impure  rites.  Did  they  even  always  know  whether 
the  sacrifices  were  addressed  to  Iahveh,  to  Baal,  or  to 
Milik  ? These  words  were  almost  synonymous.  In  all 
this,  as  one  can  see,  there  was  nothing  which  foretold 

* Families  of  Gideon  and  Sanl : Iarebaal,  Esbaal,  Milkisua. 

t Judges,  ch.  v.,  v.  8. 

I See  after,  chapter  ix.,  xi.,  xii. 


THE  JUDGES. 


?45 


a religion  of  the  spirit.  The  images,  or  rather  the 
utensils  of  wood  and  of  metal  which  were  used  for 
divination,  became  the  object  of  a shameful  traffic. 
The  Levites  who  performed  the  service  were  persons 
of  a very  low  order  of  morality. 

There  was  as  yet  no  centralisation  in  this  rude 
worship.*  Victims  were  offered  to  Iahveh  and  he  was 
consulted  at  Bethel, f at  Shiloh,:}:  at  Gibeah  of  Ben- 
jamin^ at  Grilgal, ||  at  Mizpah  of  Benjamin,^}  at  Mizpah 
of  Gilead,**  at  Dan,  and  no  doubt  in  the  temples  of 
Ebal  and  of  Garizim  beyond  Sichem.ff  Gibeah  of 
Benjamin  was  a particularly  mysterious  place.  The 
elohim  dwelt  there;  it  was  called  Gibeahha- Elohim, %% 
u the  hill  of  the  gods,”  There  was  a high  place  there 
frequented  especially  by  the  prophets.  It  seems  diffi- 
cult to  distinguish  between  the  worship  which  was 
paid  there  to  Iahveh  and  that  which  was  paid  to 
Elohim. 

The  festivals  were  rejoicings  which  bore  reference  to 

* Judges,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  6 ; ch.  xviii.,  v.  1 ; ck.  xxi.,  v.  24. 

f Judges,  ch.  xx.,  v.  18,  26  and  following;  ch.  xxi.,  v.  2 and 
following ; First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  3. 

I Judges,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  12,  19,  21. 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  5 ; ch.  xxi.,  v.  6. 

||  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  vii.,  v.  16  ; ch.  x.,  v.  8 ; ch.  xi., 
v.  14  and  following ; ch.  xv.,  v.  12,  21,  33 ; Hosea,  ch.  xii., 
v.  12. 

H Judges,  ch.  xx.,  v.  1,  3;  ch.  xxi.,  v.  1,  5,  8;  First  Book  of 
Maccabees,  ch.  iii.,  v.  46. 

**  Judges,  ch.  x.,  v.  29,  34 ; Hosea,  ch.  xii.,  v.  12. 

ft  Deuteronomy,  ch.  xxvii. ; Joshua,  ch.  viii.,  v.  30 — 35. 

ft  E'nbsn  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  x.,  v.  5 and 

following  ; Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  6. 


246  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


tlie  various  phases  of  agricultural  life.  The  sowing  in 
spring,  the  harvest,  the  grape-gatliering,  the  shearing 
of  sheep,  furnished  occasions  for  meeting  and  for 
amusement,* * * §  in  which  religion,  as  throughout  all 
antiquity,  had  its  place.  The  offerings  were  free,  each 
one  brought  what  he  could,  beasts  from  his  herds, 
loaves  of  bread,  skins  of  wine  or  of  milk.f  People 
ordinarily  went  to  the  most  revered  sanctuaries  to 
celebrate  these  festivals,  which  resembled  pilgrimages 
without  any  established  rules  being  observed. 

Eeligion  was,  so  to  speak,  personal.  Each  family 
had  its  sacred  anniversaries.  The  new  moons  were 
accompanied  by  the  ringing  of  bells  and  by  feasting, 
and  the  feast  was  always  preceded  by  a sacrifice. £ 
Kothing  bore  a greater  resemblance  to  free  worship, 
such  as  it  has  been  represented  by  the  author  of  the 
Book  of  Job.§  Each  family  had  its  household  gods  or 
teraphim , which  were  like  large  wooden  spatula,  rudely 
sculptured,  and  which,  dressed  out  in  woollen  blankets, 
had  the  appearance  of  men  or  rather  of  busts. ||  All 
religions  had  nearly  the  same  external  forms  and  the 
same  rules,  especially  as  regarded  the  state  of  qods,  or 
purity  necessary  for  observing  them.  Several  pre- 
cepts, which  were  afterwards  supposed  to  have  been 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  xxv.,  v.  2 ; Second  Book  of  Samuel, 
cb.  xiii.,  v.  23  and  following. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  3. 

| First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  xx.,  v.  5,  18,  24. 

§ Job,  cb.  i.  See  parallel  passages  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch» 
xx.  and  xxi. 

||  First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  xix.,  v.  13. 


THE  JUDGES. 


247 


revealed  to  Moses,  existed  at  that  time.  Nob,  for 
instance,  just  to  the  north  of  Jerusalem,  was  the  centre 
of  a little  Levite  worship  which  greatly  resembled  that 
which  was  consecrated  at  Jerusalem.  All  this  was 
anterior  to  the  arrival  of  the  Israelites  in  Canaan,  and 
constituted  that  old  religious  stock  in  trade  to  a 
certain  extent  indigenous  to  the  region,  which  sur- 
vives all  reforms,  and  which  never  changes. 

Although  definitively  established  on  the  soil  Israel 
in  reality  continued  to  lead  a nomad  life.  The  family 
was  the  only  group  which  existed.  What  distin- 
guished the  nomad  tribes  from  those  which  had  been 
nomad  was  their  hatred  for  central  government.  Not 
alone  did  the  Israelite  nation,  as  a body,  fail  to  recog- 
nise any  federal  authority,  but  each  tribe  lived  in  a 
sort  of  anarchy,  very  much  resembling  the  condition 
of  the  Arab  tribes  of  to-day,  where  the  life  and  the 
property  of  the  individual  are  sufficiently  pro- 
tected by  the  solidarity  of  the  members  of  the  tribe, 
although  there  was  hardly  anything  to  represent  the 
public  weal. 

Judah  had  its  chiefs.  Ephraim  had  its  chiefs. 
Every  tribe  had  a principal  or  central  point.  The  sar- 
saba , or  chief  of  the  army,  the  sofer*  or  recruiter,  had 
only  temporary  powers.  The  military  organisation,  so 
powerful  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the  Arnon  and 
of  the  Jordan,  had  evidently  dwindled  away.  The 
armament  was  poor,  the  war-horse  had  not  yet  been 

* Song  of  Deborah,  Judges,  ch.  v.  14  ; Second  Book  of 
Kings,  ch.  xxv.,  v.  19. 


i4S  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


imported  from  Egypt,  the  chariots  of  iron  were 
wanting. 

It  was  not  that  the  activity  of  the  race  was  not 
always  intense.  It  spent  itself  in  conquests  by  detail. 
Very  prolific,  the  children  of  Israel  spread  like  a drop 
of  oil;  they  gained  every  day  on  the  Canaanites  by 
their  power  of  procreation.  But  the  military  qualities 
which  the  people  possessed,  from  the  time  they  left 
Egypt  until  the  end  of  the  epoch  which,  rightly  or 
wrongly,  passes  under  the  name  of  Joshua,  had  nearly 
entirely  disappeared. 

In  presence  of  unfriendly  neighbours  a nation  thus 
unprovided  with  institutions  could  not  fail  to  experi- 
ence reverses.  The  Philistines  especially,  a little 
warlike  and  feudal  people,  cantoned  in  five  or  six  very 
strong  places,  Gaza,  Asdod,  Ascalon,  Gath,  Ekron, 
were  very  dangerous  neighbours  for  peaceful  Israel. 
When  the  tribes  of  Israel  found  themselves  too  hotly 
pressed  they  had  recourse  to  temporary  federations, 
which  produced  for  the  moment  military  unity. 
The  transitory  chief,  designated  by  a kind  of  secret 
inspiration  by  Iahveh,  was  called  sofet,  11  Judge.” 
This  was  the  name  which  the  Canaanite  towns,  which 
had  no  royal  race,  gave  to  their  consuls  A The  He- 
brew sofet  resembled  in  every  way  the  Roman  dictator. 
Only  the  theocratic  idea  which  is  at  the  bottom  of  all 
the  institutions  of  the  Semitic  people  attributed  a 

* Suffetes  (magistratis)  of  Carthage.  See  Corpus  inscr.  semit., 
part  i.,  t.  i.,  Nos.  124,  132,  143,  105,176,  199- -228,  278,  367— 
371,  especially  302. 


THE  JUDGES. 


249 


religious  character  to  this  chief  magistrate.  The  sofet 
was  at  once  the  chief  elected  by  God  and  the  inspired 
prophet.  Ilis  authority  was  absolute,  and,  as  always 
happens  in  the  East,  was  shared  by  his  family.  But 
the  necessity  of  centralisation  was  not  sufficiently 
felt  to  lead  to  the  creation  of  an  hereditary  power.* 
Israel  -j*  retained  this  trace  of  its  Bedouin  origin  in 
not  tolerating  any  durable  power.  Family  life, 
without  any  fixed  government,  was  always  its 
ideal. 

Authority  is  generally  regarded  by  the  Arab  as  a 
vexatious  tie  upon  his  actions,  and  he  desires  to  have 
the  least  possible  of  it,  because  he  does  not  know  how 
to  moderate  it,  and  because  he  does  not  see  what  good 
it  does  the  community.  Where  such  a state  of  mind 
exists  powers  are  of  short  duration,  but  as  long  as  they 
last  they  are  cruel,  terrible.  The  judge,  during  his 
magistracy,  was  a tyrant  without  a standing  army  or 
an  organised  government.  Limited  power,  even  in 
its  principle,  has  never  been  understood  in  the 
East.  The  sofet  was  a very  feeble  sovereign,  but 
the  powers  he  possessed  he  could  exercise  in  an  abso- 
lute manner.  A constitutional  sovereign  possesses 
more  extensive  powers,  but  cannot  exercise  them  in 
an  absolute  manner. 

These  governors  formed  an  almost  uninterrupted 

* It  is  remarkable  that  in  the  very  ancient  list  of  the  kings  of 
Edom  contained  in  Genesis,  ch.  xxxvi.,  no  king  is  the  son  of  his 
predecessor. 

f Especially  Israel  of  the  north,  the  true  Israel. 


ISO  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL, 


chain,*  they  required  only  succession  from  father 
to  son  to  form  a real  dynasty.  One  cannot  under- 
stand this  phenomenon  of  u spontaneous  emergency  ” 
until  one  has  studied  the  manner  in  which  a man  is 
elected  among  the  Arabs  to  play  the  part  of  com- 
mander. This  election  is  due  neither  to  descent,  nor 
to  suffrage,  nor  to  investiture  derived  from  an  over- 
lord,  nor  to  violence.  It  is  accomplished  by  a hind 
of  indication  due  to  the  superiority  of  the  man — 
to  his  ascendency,  to  his  strength,  and  to  his  courage 
in  war.  It  was  very  rare  for  a man  thus  invested  with 
a power  due  to  peculiar  circumstances  to  be  deprived 
of  it  before  his  death,  j* 

Writing  was  not  yet  common  among  the  Israelites ; 
there  was  no  sort  of  order  in  their  affairs  or  admi- 
nistration. Even  the  traditions  are  very  indistinct. 
The  memory  of  a nation  as  regards  history  is  always 
very  short.  It  is  a general  rule  of  criticism  that  there 
exists  no  history  properly  so  called  before  writing. 
People  remember  only  fables.  The  myth  is  the 
history  of  a time  when  people  could  not  write. 
Endowed  with  little  talent  for  inventing  mythological 
creations,  the  Israelites  made  up  for  it,  as  the  Hebrews 
in  the  age  of  the  patriarchs,  by  anepigraphical  monu- 
ments, heaps  of  witness,  piles  of  stones,  destined 
to  serve  as  information  for  the  future.  The  names 

* The  chronology,  taken  from  the  Book  of  Judges,  is  very 
doubtful,  and  is  in  contradiction  with  the  First  Book  of  Kings, 
ch.  vi.,  v.  1. 

t I do  not,  of  course,  speak  of  agitators  like  the  Mahdis,  who 
resemble  prophets  and  not  the  sufetim. 


THE  JUDGES. 


Z5> 


given  to  certain  places,  to  certain  long-lived  trees, 
like  the  pine,  were  also  oth  (signs)  or  nionimenta 
after  their  manner.  Certain  customs  also  had  the 
reputation  of  aiding  the  memory  and  of  keeping  alive 
recollections.  But  all  this  was  very  vague,  and  led 
to  confusion. 

The  popular  songs  constituted  a much  more  sub- 
stantial testimony.  In  the  same  degree,  in  fact,  that 
a nation  is  incapable  of  retaining  any  precise  facts  like 
those  which  history  loves,  in  like  degree  its  memory 
was  apt,  before  the  age  of  writing,*  to  retain  rhyme 
and  song.  It  was  thus  that  each  Arab  tribe,  without 
the  aid  of  writing,  formerly  preserved  the  whole  Divan 
of  its  poetry;  it  is  thus  that  the  ante-Islamite  Arab 
memory,  appealed  to  in  vain  for  any  precise  bit  of 
historical  information,  preserved,  until  the  men  of 
letters  arrived  from  Bagdad  a hundred  and  fifty  years 
after  Mahomet,  the  enormous  poetical  treasures  of  the 
Kitab  el-Aghdni , of  the  Moallakdt , and  other  poems  of 
the  same  kind.  The  Touareg  tribes  of  the  present 
day  furnish  phenomena  of  the  same  description.-]* 

Israel  thus  possessed  a very  fine  unwritten  literature, 
as  Greece  retained,  during  three  or  four  hundred  years, 
the  whole  Homeric  cycle  in  its  memory.  One  may  say, 
in  fact,  that  the  unwritten  literature  of  each  race  is 
the  best  which  it  has  produced.  Studied  composi- 
tions never  equal  spontaneous  literary  productions. 

* Plato,  Phcedo,  59. 

t Hanoteau,  Gramm.  Tamachek,  Paris,  1860 ; Poesies  populaires 
de  la  Kabylie  du  Jurjura , Paris,  1867. 

I 


25 2 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

At  a later  date  these  songs,  committed  to  writing, 
proved  the  pearl  of  Hebrew  poetry,  as  the  old  Arab 
songs  formed  the  really  original  portion  of  Arab  litera- 
ture. The  finest  pages  of  the  Bible  came  from  the 
lips  of  women  and  children  who,  after  each  victory, 
received  the  conqueror  with  cries  of  joy  and  to  the 
sound  of  the  timbrel. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


DEBORAH. 

Epic  tradition  placed  in  these  early  times  the  in- 
vasion of  the  King  of  Mesopotamia,  Cusan  Riseata'im  * 
who  subdued  Israel.  A certain  Othoniel,  nephew  of 
the  legendary  Caleb,  f is  said  to  have  delivered  the 
people  of  Iahveh4  All  this  episode  is  plunged  in  the 
region  of  fable. 

The  story  of  a very  early  collision  between  Israel 
and  Moab  appears  to  be  much  more  authentic.  Eglon, 
King  of  Moab,  seems  to  have  rendered  Israel  tributary. 
An  enterprising  man  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  named 
Ehoud,  of  the  warlike  family  of  Gero,  killed  Eglon 
by  surprise  ; then,  at  the  head  of  the  Benjamites 
and  the  Ephraim  ites,  beat  the  Moabites  at  the  ford 
of  the  Jordan,  near  Gilgal.§ 

A certain  Samgar,  son  of  Anat,||  was  sofet  during 
a period  disturbed  by  the  Philistines.  People  attri- 
buted to  him  fabulous  exploits  resembling  those  of 

* The  meaning  of  these  words  is  not  clear. 

t See  p.  205. 

f Judges,  ch.  iii.,  v.  7 — 12. 

§ Judges,  ch.  iii.,  y.  12 — 30. 

||  Judges,  ch.  iii.,  v.  31  ; ch.  v.,  v.  0. 

T 2 


254  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


the  mythical  Samson,  exploits  which  perhaps  had 
their  origin  in  a popular  song  no  longer  extant.* * * § 

Jabin,  the  Canaanite  King  of  Hazor,  bitterly  op- 
pressed the  Israelitish  tribes  of  the  north,  j*  Hazor  J 
was  the  centre  of  a tolerably  powerful  Canaanite  state, 
embracing  all  the  southern  portion  of  Lake  Houle, 
which  then,  as  to-day,  is  dry  during  a portion  of 
the  year.  These  plains  were  propitious  for  the 
use  of  armour-clad  chariots.  It  appears  that  Jabin 
had  nine  hundred  of  these  formidable  engines.  His 
power  extended  over  the  plain  of  Jezrael,  where 
the  effect  of  these  chariots  was  more  terrible  still. 
His  sar-saba,  or  general-in-chief,  Sisera,  appears  to 
have  been  a skilful  man  of  war.  He  was  the  lord  of 
a powerful  fief  which  the  Israelites  called  Ilaroset- 
haggoim.  Perhaps  even  he  became  the  successor  of 
Jabin.  § 

Kow  there  was  a prophetess  called  Deborah  who 
judged  Israel  in  those  days.  The  position  of  women 
in  the  patriarchal  tribes  was  not  at  all  what  it  after- 
wards became,  when  life  in  the  harem,  dating  from 
Solomon,  had  entirely  debased  morality.  An  alleged 
sister  of  Moses,  named  Miriam,  assumed  at  that  period, 

* Judges,  ch.  iii.,  v.  31.  The  words  npnn 
msa  appear  to  be  the  second  part  of  a distich  in  which  was 
hyperbolically  related  the  triumph  of  a simple  agriculturist  over 
Philistine  warriors. 

t Judges,  ch.  iv.,  v.  2 and  following;  Joshua,  ch.  xi.,  v.  1 and 
following. 

X The  site  of  Hazor  is  uncertain. 

§ There  is  no  mention  of  Jabin  in  the  Song  of  Deborah. 


DEBORAH. 


255 


in  the  legend  of  the  flight  from  Egypt,  a part  the 
nature  of  which  it  is  difficult  to  gather  from  the 
Scriptures,  as  they  now  read.*  Some  women  were 
their  own  mistresses,  disposing  of  their  property, 
choosing  their  husbands,  performing  all  the  acts 
of  a virile  existence,  comprising  prophecy  and 
poetry.  It  was  the  same  among  the  Arabs.  The 
stories  told  concerning  the  existence  of  the  tribes 
before  Islam  mention  several  Deborahs,  uniting  the 
functions  of  chief  and  of  poet.  The  anecdotes  relative 
to  these  heroines  formed  an  essential  part  in  the  epic 
cycle  of  the  nation.-)*  Islamism  itself  crowned  with 
a halo  Hind,  the  daughter  of  Otbah,  who  sang,  at 
the  head  of  a choir  of  women,  at  the  battle  of  Ohod, 
and  greatly  contributed  towards  the  victory  of  the 
believers. 

The  inspired  daughter  of  Israel  usually  sat  under  a 
palm-tree,  which  was  called  the  palm-tree  of  Deborah, 
between  Eamah  and  Bethel,  and  the  Israelites  went 
to  her  to  learn  the  judgment  of  God.  The  prophetess, 
like  all  the  patriotic  women,  was  devoted  to  the  wor- 
ship of  Iahveh,  and  considered,  it  is  said,  as  criminal, 
all  religious  innovations,  all  the  leaning  of  the 
people  towards  the  worship  of  Canaan.^  Deborah 

* Remark  Micah,  ch.  vi.,  v.  4. 

t Amrab,  daughter  of  Amir,  Hind,  daughter  of  Khouss,  Hind, 
tighter  of  Otbah,  Sedjah,  the  prophetess  of  Moseilama  [Barbiei 
de  Meynard], 

J Song,  especially  v.  8.  The  lesson  is  very  doubtful.  After  all 
this  idea  does  not  much  exceed  that  expressed  by  the  King  of 
Meza  in  his  inscription,  lines  5,  0 : nins‘2  FpNTI  'Q. 


256  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


took  in  hand  the  deliverance  of  her  people.  She  sent 
an  order,  in  the  name  of  Iahveh,  to  a certain  Barak, 
son  of  Abinoam,  of  Kadish  in  Kaphtali,  to  assemble 
the  Kaphtalites  and  the  Zabul unites  at  Kadish  and  then 
to  march  upon  Tabor.  She  herself  arrived,  bringing 
with  her  the  men  of  Ephraim,  of  Benjamin,  and  of 
Manasseh  this  side  of  Jordan.  The  tribes  beyond  Jor- 
dan, although  summoned,  the  maritime  tribes  of  Dan 
and  of  Asher,  did  not  move.  Judah  and  Simeon  were 
perhaps  occupied  for  their  own  part  in  struggling 
against  the  Philistines.1 * * * § Besides  at  this  epoch  they 
almost  always  formed  a separate  band.j* 

This  great  muster  of  the  forces  of  Israel  at  the  foot 
of  Mount  Tabor  alarmed  the  Canaanites  of  the  Upper 
J orclan  and  the  Plain  of  J ezrael.  Sisera  hurried  there 
with  the  troops  of  the  kingdom  of  Hazor.  Tanach 
and  Megiddo,  which  were  Canaanite  towns,  also  took 
up  arms  against  Israel. £ It  is  probable  that  the  army 
of  Israel  marched  from  Tabor  on  the  rear  of  their 
adversaries.  Sisera  came  to  their  rescue.  The  battle, 
in  fact,  was  fought  near  the  brook  Kishon,  close 
to  Megiddo.  Sisera  was  totally  defeated.  It  seems 
that  the  heavy  rain,§  which  may  have  hampered  the 
chariots  and  which  swelled  the  streams  of  which  the 

* They  are  not  mentioned  in  the  Song. 

f Remark  the  omission  of  the  feats  of  Judah  in  the  Book  of 
Judges,  the  name  of  Israel  claimed  by  the  kingdom  of  the  north 
after  the  schism,  the  absence  of  Judah  and  of  Jerusalem  in  the 
inscription  of  Meza,  &c. 

X Song,  ch.  v.,  v.  19. 

§ Song  of  Deborah. 


DEBORAH. 


257 


Kislion  is  formed,  was  prejudicial  to  the  retreat  of  the 
Canaanites. 

Sisera  endeavoured,  with  the  remains  of  his  army, 
to  reach  the  north.  The  Israelites  pursued  him.  The 
men  of  Meroz,*  ill  disposed  towards  Israel,  favoured 
his  flight;  but  the  Israelites  found  allies  in  the 
Ivenites  who  were  encamped  in  the  vicinity  of  Kadish. 

These  nomad  Kenites,  who  since  the  flight  from 
Egypt  had  always  been  on  good  terms  with  Israel, 
were  also  at  peace  with  Jabin.  But  the  desire  of 
pleasing  Barak  carried  the  day,  and  it  was  a Kenite 
woman  who  procured  for  Iahveh  what  was  most  dear 
to  him,  the  death  of  one  of  his  enemies. 

Sisera,  running  on  foot,  arrived  at  the  door  of  a 
Kenite  tent.  The  husband  was  absent ; the  wife, 
named  Jael,  invited  the  fugitive  to  enter,  and  con- 
cealed him  with  a mantle.  Sisera  asked  for  a little 
water.  Jael  opened  a skin  of  milk  and  gave  him  to 
drink.  Sisera  being  weary  fell  asleep.  Then  Jael 
took  one  of  those  large  pegs  used  for  pitching  a tent, 
seized  a hammer,  and  smote  the  peg  into  the  temple 
of  Sisera  so  deeply  that  it  went  through  the  temples 
and  fastened  them  to  the  ground.  Shortly  afterwards 
Barak  arrived  and  was  much  pleased  at  the  sight. 

Upon  that  day  Deborah  and  Barak  the  son  of 
Abinoam  sang  thus.j* 

This  noble  song,  written  by  the  prophetess,  was 

* To-day  Marous,  between  Safed  and  Lake  Houle. 

t Here  M.  Renan  quotes  the  entire  Song  of  Deborah, 
frequently  quoted  from  already.  [Translator.] 


25 8 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL 

learned  by  heart,  and  became  a model  which  was  imi- 
tated in  other  songs  of  the  same  hind.  It  was  after- 
wards written  out  and  inserted  in  the  Kitab  el-Aghuni 
of  Israel.  No  doubt  it  then  underwent  a good  many 
alterations.  Some  pietist  reflections  may  have  been 
added ; several  passages  became  obscure  owing  to 
the  faults  of  the  copyists ; but  the  originality  of  the 
old  Hebrew  sir  shines  out  still,  through  all  these 
mutilations,  with  unparalleled  splendour. 


CHAPTER  IX. 


FIRST  ATTEMPTS  AT  ROYALTY. 

GIDEON,  ABIMELECH.* 

Owing  to  the  love  of  order  and  laborious  habits  of 
Israel,  a great  number  of  rich  and  powerful  families 
were  formed;  but  on  all  sides  the  nation,  like  an 
undefended  town,  was  open  to  attack.  It  was  impos- 
sible to  found  anything  solid.  Israel  had  not  only  to 
fight  against  the  Canaanites,  the  Philistines,  the  Moab- 
ites, the  Ammonites,  u the  dwellers  in  tents,”  as  they 
were  called,  the  nomad  Midianites  and  Ainalekites, 
but  to  repel  the  invasions  of  the  Arabs  of  the  great 
desert,  known  by  the  generic  name  of  Beni-Quedem  or 
Orientals  (Saracens),  who  came  with  their  camels, 
especially  after  seed  time,  encamped  in  the  open, 
and  destroyed  the  growing  crops,  like  a plague  of 
locusts.  They  advanced  as  far  as  Gaza,  where  the 
Philistines  stopped  them  ; then  they  returned  to  the 
desert,  carrying  away  with  them  all  the  flocks  and 
beasts  of  burden. 

These  annual  invasions  kept  the  people  in  terror. 
They  did  not  dare  to  fight  in  the  open  ground. 
W hen  the  pillagers  arrived  the  Israelites  barricaded 
* Judges,  ch.  vi. — ix. 


z6o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


themselves  in  caverns  or  improvised  fortresses  in  the 
mountains.  From  this  epoch  were  supposed  to  date 
the  fortified  caverns  and  the  masada , or  hill  tops 
covered  with  stones,  which  are  so  common  in  Pales- 
tine, and  which  on  many  occasions  served  the  people 
of  the  plain  as  refuges  against  sudden  invasion. 

A family  of  Manasseh,  consequently  of  J oseph,  that 
of  Abiezer,  which  resided  at  Ophra,  to  the  west  of 
Sichem,  near  the  lower  slopes  of  Ephraim,  assumed 
in  this  sad  state  of  affairs  a great  importance,  and 
nearly  gave  Israel  that  dynasty  which  would  have 
realised  its  unity.  These  Abiezrites  were  very  fine 
men,  heroes,  like  unto  the  sons  of  a king.  They 
were  not  exclusive  servants  of  Iahveh.  They  raised 
altars  to  Baal  and  to  Asera  ; they  reserved  their 
Iahvehism  for  what  appertained  to  Iahveh,  the 
oracles  of  the  ephod.  In  acting  thus  they  probably 
believed  that  they  were  doing  him  no  more  harm 
than  the  Latins  or  the  Hernici  thought  that  they 
were  offending  the  Fortuna  of  Praeneste  in  honouring 
Jupiter  of  Latium  or  Neptune  of  Antium. 

Put  Iahveh  was  always  a jealous  god;  he  would 
tolerate  no  rival.  There  was  a kind  of  struggle  in  this 
important  Israelite  family  between  the  various  tenden- 
cies into  which  the  conscience  of  Israel  was  divided. 
Joas,  the  chief  of  the  family,  had  an  altar  to  Baal,  sur- 
mounted by  a large  Asera  in  wood.  Every  day  he 
sacrificed  a bull  upon  the  altar.*  His  eldest  son,  a 
superb  and  vigorous  man,  a regular  gibbor , was  called 
* Judges,  ch.  vi.,  v.  25,  26. 


FIRST  ATTEMPTS  AT  ROYALTY. 


261 


Jerubaal  (one  who  feared  Baal),  and  was  at  first  devoted 
to  the  worship  of  that  divinity.  It  must  he  remembered 
that  Ophra  was  in  the  midst  of  the  Canaanite  tribes  of 
the  coast.  The  great  body  of  the  population  of  that 
place  worshipped  Baal  and  Asera.  The  religious  con- 
fusion was  extreme.  The  Baal-Berith  of  Sichem  still 
held  its  own  in  those  parts  against  Iahveh.* 

Motives  of  which  we  are  ignorant  induced  Jarubaal 
to  adopt  the  exclusive  worship  of  Iahveh.  This  con- 
version was  afterwards  attributed  to  a vision,  and  it  is 
quite  possible  that  in  the  case  of  Jerubaal,  as  in  that 
related  by  Moses,  there  was  some  tangible  fact. 
Jerubaal  appears  to  have  seen  one  of  those  apparitions 
of  flame  in  which  it  was  believed  that  Iahveh  revealed 
himself.  One  day  while  he  was  threshing  his  corn  to 
save  it  from  the  Midianitcs  who  were  ravaging  the 
country  he  thought  that  he  beheld  Iahveh  (or  the  angel 
of  Iahveh).  When  an  apparition  of  this  kind  took  place, 
the  best  thing  to  do  was  to  offer  a repast  to  the  Maleak 
in  order  to  appease  his  hunger,  ■f  Jerubaal  prepared 
a kid  and  some  unleavened  bread,  and  having  placed 
the  flesh  in  a basket  and  the  broth  in  a pot  he  carried 
them  under  the  pine-tree  and  offered  them  to  Maleak , 
who  said  to  him,  “Take  the  flesh  and  the  cakes  and  place 
them  upon  this  rock,  and  as  for  the  gravy  pour  it  out.” 
Iahveh  touched  the  meat  and  the  cakes  with  the  end  of 
the  rod  which  he  held  in  his  hand.  Then  the  fire 
issued  from  the  rock,  devoured  the  meat  and  the  cakes, 

* Judges,  ch.  viii.,  v.  83;  ch.  ix.,  v.  27. 

f See  Abraham  and  his  three  guests,  Genesis,  ch.  xviiL 


z6z  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


and  Iahveh  disappeared.*  Jerubaal  understood  that 
he  had  seen  Iahveh,  and  was  much  frightened,  for  he 
believed  that  he  was  going  to  die,  as  this  god  could 
not  be  looked  upon  face  to  face.  Iahveh  reassured 
him,  and  Jerubaal  built  him  an  altar  which  he  called 
Iahveh-Salom , which  existed  a long  time  at  Ophrah. 

From  that  moment  Jerubaal  became  a fervent  wor- 
shipper of  Iahveh.  How  Iahveh,  as  we  have  said, 
was  a jealous  god.  lie  liked  not  the  other  gods,  even 
the  most  patient.  One  night  Jerubaal  took  ten  of  his 
servants  with  him  and  demolished  the  altar  of  Baal 
and  the  Asera  which  was  on  it.  The  next  day  there 
was  a tumult  in  the  town,  and  in  the  house  of  his 
father.  They  demanded  from  Joas  the  life  of  the  per- 
son guilty  of  this  sacrilege.  Joas  seems  to  have 
replied  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  god  himself  to 
avenge  the  insult.  However  that  may  be,  Jerubaal 
went  over  to  the  worship  of  Iahveh,  and  thenceforward 
took  the  name  of  Gideon.  He  raised  an  altar  to 
Iahveh  in  the  acropolis  of  Ophrah,  and  offered  up  a 
holocaust  with  the  wood  of  the  Asera  which  he  had 
overturned.  It  appears  that  the  Abiezrites  followed 
his  example  to  a certain  extent. 

The  worship  of  Iahveh  was  in  some  measure  synony- 
mous to  patriotism.  Converted  to  the  exclusive  wor- 
ship of  Iahveh,  Gideon  became,  like  Deborah,  an 
ardent  champion  of  Israel.  Later  on  we  shall  see  the 
unity  of  Israel  definitively  accomplished  by  David  in 

* Judges,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  20. 

f Judges,  ch.  vi.,  v.  34. 


FIRST  ATTEMPTS  AT  ROYALTY. 


263 


tlie  name  of  Iahveh.  Every  action  on  the  part  of  the 
central  power  was  accomplished  in  the  name  of  Iahveh, 
and  it  was  not  without  reason  that  the  hook  of  the 
victories  of  Israel  was  called  u the  book  of  the  wars 
of  Iahveh.”  An  opportunity  soon  presented  itself  to 
Gideon  to  serve  his  new  god  in  the  way  which  he 
liked. 

The  Midianites,  the  Amalekites,  and  the  Saracens 
invaded  the  plain  of  Jazrael,  under  the  leadership  of 
the  two  chiefs  Zebah  and  Zalmunna.*  They  found  at 
Tabor  some  Israelites  of  good  family,  whom  they  killed, 
and  who  were  related  to  the  Abiezrites.  Gideon 
assembled  the  Abiezrites,  sent  messengers  throughout 
Manasseh,  received  the  auxiliaries  of  Asher,  Zabulon, 
and  Naphtali,  and,  encouraged  by  divers  signs,  which 
assured  him  that  Iahveh  was  with  him,  encamped  in 
the  mountains  of  Gilboa,  near  Ain  - Harod.  The 
Midianites  were  opposite  to  him,  at  the  foot  of  the 
little  chain  of  Moreh,  called  to-day  Dgebel- Dahi. 
Gideon  succeeded  in  putting  them  to  flight  to  the  cry 
of  “ For  Iahveh  and  for  Gideon.” 

The  Midianites,  instead  of  returning  over  the  Jordan 
at  the  place  where  they  had  crossed  it  a few  days  before, 
diverged  to  the  south-east,  towards  Bath-Sean,  then 
towards  the  south,  following  the  Ghor  as  far  as  Abel- 
Mehola.  Gideon  saw  that  he  had  not  enough  men  with 
him  to  pursue  them.  He  made  another  appeal  to  the 
tribes  of  the  north,  and  asked  the  Ephraimites,  whom  he 
had  up  to  that  time  neglected,  to  join  him,  in  order  to 

* These  may  be  imaginary  names,  like  Orcb  and  Zecb. 


26+  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 

cut  off  the  Miclianites  from  the  fords  of  the  Jordan. 
The  Ephraimites  responded  to  this  appeal  on  the  part 
of  Gideon.  On  leaving  Abel-Mehola  the  Midianites 
split  np  into  two  hands.  One  passed  the  Jordan,  under 
the  command  of  Zebah  and  Zalmunna.  The  other 
continued  to  descend  the  Ghor  in  quest  of  the  fords  of 
the  south.  The  Ephraimites,  going  across  toward  the 
east,  came  up  with  this  band  near  the  lower  Jordan, 
and  destroyed  it  in  two  places,  which  they  called  “ the 
rock  of  Oreb ,”  or  of  the  crow,  “the  wine-press  of 
Zeeb ,”  or  the  wolf.  The  popular  legend  afterwards 
saw  in  the  two  names,  Oreb  and  Zceb,  the  names  of 
two  Midianite  chiefs  who  had  been  slain  at  that  place. 

Gideon,  however,  with  his  vigorous  Abiezrites, 
passed  the  Jordan  on  the  heels  of  Zebah  and  Zalmunna, 
and  plunged  into  the  valley  of  Jabbok.  The  Gadites 
of  Succoth  and  of  Penuel  ought  to  have  aided  him. 
They  did  nothing.  They  even  refused  to  furnish  the 
Abiezrites  with  bread.  The  Israelites  beyond  Jordan 
possessed  little  patriotism,  or  rather  they  were  held 
in  check  by  fear  of  the  Bedouins.  They  refused  to 
compromise  themselves  with  dangerous  neighbours 
against  whom  the  tribes  of  the  west  could  not  always 
protect  them.  Gideon  pursued  the  Bedouins  as  far  as 
the  road  called  “the  dwellers  of  the  tents,”  which 
passed  to  the  east  of  Hobah  and  Jogbehah.  He  beat 
them  at  Qarqor,  then  he  pursued  them  and  captured 
the  two  kings,  Zebah  and  Zalmunna.  “ What  manner 
of  men  were  those  whom  you  killed  at  Tabor  ? ” asked 
he  of  Zebah  and  Zalmunna.  “ Men  like  you,”  they 


FIRST  A TTEMPTS  A T ROYAL  TY.  265 

replied  ; u all  were  fine  men,  like  a king’s  sons.”  And 
Gideon  said,  “ They  were  my  brothers,  the  sons  of 
my  mother.  As  Jehovah  liveth,  if  you  had  not  slain 
them,  I would  not  have  killed  you.”  And  Gideon 
said  to  Jether,  his  first-born,  “ Arise  and  slay  them!” 

The  young  man  hesitating  to  kill  such  heroes,  Zebah 
and  Zalmunna  said  to  Gideon,  “ Rise  thou  and  fall 
upon  us,  for  as  the  man  is,  so  is  his  strength.”  And 
Gideon  arose  and  slew  Zebah  and  Zalmunna,  and  he 
took  the  ornaments  that  were  on  their  camels’  necks. 
Returning  by  w iy  of  Penuel  and  Succoth,  he  cruelly 
punished  the  men  of  those  two  cities  for  their  conduct 
when  he  had  passed  that  way  the  first  time. 

The  return  of  Gideon  to  this  side  of  Jordan  was  a 
triumph.  His  height,  his  beauty,  his  strength  pro- 
claimed him  a king.  The  raid  he  had  made  with  the 
Abiezrites  into  the  very  heart  of  the  Arab  tribes  of  the 
east  had  procured  treasures  for  him.  All  the  Arab 
tribes  known  under  the  name  of  Ismaelim*  had  greatly 
enriched  themselves  by  commerce.  The  plunder  cap- 
tured from  them  astonished  the  poor  and  laborious 
tribes  of  Israel.  There  were  heaps  of  golden  rings 
( nezm),  collars  and  crescents  for  the  necks  of  the 
camels,  earrings  formed  of  a single  pearl,  rich  purple 
garments  for  their  kings.  Gideon  took  a large  part  of 
the  booty  for  himself,  the  Abiezrites  had  the  rest. 
The  Ephraimites,  on  the  contrary,  displayed  jealousy ; 
Gideon  had  not  called  upon  them  until  late.  They 
were  charged  with  the  least  advantageous  duty  of  the 
* Judges,  ch.  viii.,  v.  24. 


2 56  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


campaign,  that  of  pursuing  the  Midianite  stra  gglers  who 
had  been  unable  to  repass  the  J ordan.  They  took  no 
part  in  the  pillage  of  the  great  encampments  of  the  East. 
Gideon  soothed  them  with  soft  words  and  flattered 
their  vanity.  “The  gleaning  of  the  grapes  of  Ephraim,” 
he  said,  “is  worth  more  than  the  vintage  of  Abiezer.” 

This  campaign  of  Gideon  was  one  of  extreme  import- 
ance. The  songs  composed  on  this  subject  have  not 
been  preserved,  but  there  was  woven  round  it  a legend 
which  has  come  down  to  us  and  which  can  be  com- 
pared with  the  finest  episodes  of  the  Greek  epos * A 
dream  was  related  which  was  held  to  be  symbolical. 
A cake  of  barley  bread  tumbled  into  the  host  of  Midian, 
and  came  unto  a tent,  and  smote  it  that  it  fell,  and  over- 
turned it,  that  the  tent  lay  along,  j*  The  cake  of  barley 
bread  was  the  Israelite  agriculturist,  already  settled  on 
the  soil,  managing,  in  spite  of  his  poverty,  to  destroy  the 
nomads  who  invaded  his  land.  The  victory  of  Gideon 
was,  in  fact,  a capital  event  in  the  history  of  Syrian 
Semitism.  The  Hebrew  settler  eventually  subdued 
those  of  his  race  who  had  continued  the  same  mode 
of  life  which  he  himself  had  long  led.  Midianites, 
Amalekites,  Islimaelites,  and  Beni-Quedem,  were  con- 
fined to  their  deserts  to  the  east  and  to  the  south  of 
Palestine.  The  sedentary  tribes  managed  to  defend 
themselves  on  their  own  soil,  even  when  they  had  not, 
like  the  Israelites,  any  permanent  central  power. 

Gideon  appeared  to  be  quite  marked  out  to  give  to 

* The  chapters  vi.,  vii.,  viii.  of  the  Book  of  Judges  have  an  epic 
character  all  their  own. 

f Judges,  ch.  vii.,  v.  13. 


FIRST  ATTEMPTS  AT  ROYALTY.  267 

Israel  wliat  it  required  in  this  respect.  lie  was  tall, 
robust,  courageous.  The  campaign  against  the  Midian- 
ites  of  the  eastern  desert  had  made  him  rich,  and 
had  procured  him  royal  garments.  lie  possessed  a 
numerous  seraglio  at  Ophrah,  and  Canaanite  concu- 
bines in  several  places,  notably  at  Sichem.*  It  was 
reckoned  that  he  had  as  many  as  seventy  sons. 

Gideon  seemed  therefore  fated  to  achieve  what  David 
did  afterwards ; to  create  upon  the  one  hand  monarchi- 
cal unity  and  a legitimate  dynasty  in  Israel,  and  on 
the  other  hand  to  fuse  the  Canaanites  and  the  Israel- 
ites into  a single  race.  But  the  worship  of  Iahveh  was 
at  no  epoch  favourable  to  a royal  form  of  government. f 
The  system  of  the  sofeiim , taken  from  the  crowd  by 
popular  designation  equivalent  to  the  choice  of  Iahveh, 
was  much  more  in  conformity  with  the  spirit  of  that 
religion.  Gideon  replied  to  all  the  demands  that  he 
should  accept  the  title  of  hereditary  King  of  Israel,  11  It 
is  Iahveh  who  reigns  over  you.”  He,  perhaps,  per- 
ceived in  time  the  difficulties  which  afterwards  revealed 
themselves  to  the  unfortunate  Saul.  It  appears  that 
upon  this  point  the  text  of  the  Book  of  Judges  is  inten- 
tionally obscure.  The  exalted  idea  of  theocracy  which 
it  ascribes  to  Gideon  scarcely  corresponds  with  the  ex- 
treme coarseness  which  he  imported  into  his  new  reli- 
gion. The  Iahvehism  of  Gideon  seems  to  have  consisted 
for  the  most  part  in  the  superstitious  practices  of  the 
ephod.  How  these  practices  had  little  to  do  with  the 

* Judges,  ch.  viii.,  v.  31. 
f First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  viii. 

U 


1 68  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


principles  of  puritans  and  theocrats  who  had  sworn 
hatred  to  royalty. 

Gideon  was  neither  above  nor  below  the  religious 
ideas  of  his  time,  and  several  of  his  acts  which  ap- 
peared scandalous  afterwards  wTere  found  quite  natural 
in  his  epoch.  He  wished  to  employ  in  a pious  work 
a portion  of  the  money  which  he  had  gained  during 
his  expedition,  and  he  had  an  epliod  cast  with  the  gold, 
that  is  to  say  an  image  of  lahveh,  which  could  be 
used  for  delivering  oracles.  This  ephod,  set  up  at 
Ophrah,  had  a great  vogue ; all  Israel  flocked  thither 
in  pilgrimage  and  for  consultation. 

This  was  a crime  in  the  eyes  of  the  most  recent 
Iahvehists,  who  held  that  lahveh  could  be  worshipped 
in  one  place  alone,  and  that  no  material  image  should 
be  made  to  represent  him.  But  Gideon  certainly  did 
not  believe  that  he  was  offending  lahveh  when  he 
cast  in  his  honour  a symbol  of  gold  like  that  which 
was  contained  in  the  ark.  There  were  many  other 
ephods  of  this  kind  belonging  to  private  individuals.* 
The  idea  of  unity  of  worship  did  not  exist  at  that 
epoch.  The  ark  was  at  Bethel  or  at  Shiloh,  that  is  to 
say,  at  a considerable  distance  from  Ophrah  and 
among  rival  tribes.  Gideon  was  not,  perhaps,  so 
exempt  from  dynastic  ambition  as  more  modern  his- 
torians wish  to  make  out.  lie  may  have  dreamed  of 
creating  round  him  a religious  centre  which  would 
have  been  entirely  under  his  control.  We  shall  see 

* The  deed  of  Gideon  is  not  in  any  way  related  as  an  isolated 


crime. 


FIRST  ATTEMPTS  AT  ROYALTY.  ztg 

Jeroboam  do  the  same  thing,  in  an  age  when  the  ideas 
of  centralisation  were  more  advanced.  The  severity 
of  the  sacred  historian  comes  from  the  fact  that  he 
had  judged  Gideon  by  the  rules  of  another  epoch. 
The  Iahveh  of  Gideon,  however,  bore  no  resem- 
blance to  the  Iahveh  whose  worship  afterwards  pre- 
vailed. It  was  a sacrament  of  gold,  worked  by  a 
mechanical  contrivance ; it  was  above  all  a machine 
with  which  a great  deal  of  money  was  made.  The 
pilgrims,  in  fact,  paid  for  an  answer.  It  greatly  in- 
creased the  wealth  of  Gideon. 

His  contemporaries  did  not  blame  him  for  construct- 
ing his  ephod.  He  lived  happily,  died  at  a very  great 
age,  and  was  buried  in  the  tomb  of  his  father  Joash 
at  Ophrah. 

Gideon  had  so  truly  exercised,  among  the  Josephites 
of  Manasseh  and  Ephraim,  an  almost  royal  power, 
that  his  succession  was  disputed  after  his  death  as 
if  he  had  been  a king.  His  numerous  family  claimed 
to  exercise,  at  Ophrah,  the  supremacy  which  the 
sofet  of  Manasseh  had  conquered.  This  soon  pro- 
duced opposition.  A bastard  named  Abimelech,  a 
son  of  Gideon  by  a Canaanite  woman,  who  lived  at 
Sichem,  assumed  a hostile  attitude  towards  his  bro- 
thers of  Ophrah.  A Canaanite  and  a Sichcmite  on  his 
mother’s  side,  he  became  the  champion  of  the  preten- 
sions of  Sichem  and  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  against  the 
Abiezerites  of  Ophrah.  The  Sichemites  gave  him  the 
money  of  the  temple  of  Baal-Berith,  whose  rites  he 
probably  professed.  "With  this  money  Abimelech 

u 2 


2>o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


raised  a band  of  idle  scamps,  ready  for  anything, 
who  swore  to  live  or  die  in  his  service.  The  first 
crime  which  he  caused  them  to  commit  was  aimed  at 
his  half-brothers  of  Ophrah.  It  is  said  that  they  were 
all  slain  with  the  exception  of  Jotham,  who  succeeded 
in  hiding  himself. 

Sichem  was  a mixed  town,  Israelite  and  Canaanite 
at  the  same  time.  Abimelech  was,  in  a way,  just  the 
man  to  be  popular  there.  His  name  indicated  that  he 
was  devoted  to  the  religion  of  Milik  or  Moloch,  which 
shows  at  least  a great  amount  of  eclecticism.  The  two 
populations  agreed  to  make  him  king.  This  royalty, 
which  lasted  for  three  years,  remained  almost  exclu- 
sively Ephraimite,  and  was  always  disputed,  even  at 
Sichem.  The  survivors  of  the  family  of  Gideon  never 
ceased  to  proclaim  the  unworthiness  of  Abimelech,  and 
to  excite  public  opinion  against  this  sham  royalty. 
Here  is  the  discourse  which  the  old  historian  places  in 
the  mouth  of  Jotham  : — “Harken  unto  me,  ye  men 
of  Sichem,  that  God  may  harken  to  you.  The  trees 
went  forth  on  a time  to  anoint  a king  over  them : and 
they  said  unto  the  olive-tree,  Eeign  thou  over  us. 
But  the  olive-tree  said  unto  them,  Should  I leave  my 
fatness,  wherewith  by  me  they  honour  God  and  man, 
and  go  to  be  promoted  over  the  other  trees  ? And 
the  trees  said  to  the  fig-tree,  Come  thou  and  reign 
over  us.  But  the  fig-tree  said  unto  them,  Should  I 
forsake  my  sweetness  and  my  good  fruit,  and  go  to  be 
promoted  over  the  trees  ? Then  said  the  trees  unto 
the  vine,  Come  thou  and  reign  over  us.  And  the 


FIRST  ATTEMPTS  AT  ROYALTY. 


271 


vine  said  unto  them,  Should  I leave  my  wine,  which 
cheereth  God  and  man,  and  go  to  be  promoted  over 
the  trees  ? Then  said  all  the  trees  unto  the  bramble, 
Come  thou  and  reign  over  us.  And  the  bramble  said 
unto  the  trees,  If  in  truth  you  anoint  me  king  over 
3rou,  then  come  and  put  your  trust  in  my  shadow ; and 
if  not  let  fire  come  out  of  the  bramble,  and  devour  the 
cedars  of  Lebanon.” 

This  was  equivalent  to  saying  that  really  useful 
people  avoid  the  task  of  governing  men,  and  that  those 
alone  do  not  hesitate  to  undertake  the  burden  who  have 
nothing  in  them,  and  who  believe  that  they  can  escape 
from  all  difficulty  by  vain  boasting.  The  hostile 
allusion  to  Abimelech  was  transparent.  As  a matter 
of  fact  that  wretched  improvised  royalty  rapidly  fell 
into  disrepute.  The  bandits  of  Abimelech  began  to 
practise  robbery  in  the  mountains,  nor  could  Abi- 
melech hinder  them.  The  Sichemites  grew  disaffected. 
In  the  feasts  which  took  place  at  the  temple  of  Baal- 
Berith,  after  the  sacrifices  they  denounced  Abimelech. 
He  left  the  city  in  order  to  settle  at  Aruma,  two 
leagues  from  there,  to  the  south-west,  leaving  behind 
him  as  his  lieutenant  a man  called  Zeboul.  A certain 
Gaal,  son  of  Ebed,  a stranger  but  of  great  influence, 
placed  himself  at  the  head  of  the  opposition,  and  dared 
to  do  battle  with  Abimelech.  Abimelech  defeated 
him,  and  took  the  lower  town  of  Sichem,  upon  which 
he  revenged  himself  cruelly.  The  dwellers  in  the 
upper  town,  to  the  number  of  a thousand  men  and 
women,  took  refuge  in  the  cellars  of  the  temple  of 


272  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


Baal-Berith ; Abimelech  caused  the  cellars  to  he 
covered  with  green  branches,  set  them  on  fire,  and 
smothered  all  who  were  within. 

He  then  marched  against  Thebez,  four  leagues  from 
Sichem,  towards  the  north.  The  inhabitants  with- 
drew into  the  fortified  place  in  the  middle  of  the 
town.  Huddled  together  on  the  roofs,  they  awaited 
their  fate  with  anxiety.  Abimelecli  approached  the 
gate  to  set  it  on  fire.  A woman  then  flung  the 
upper  part  of  a millstone  on  his  head  and  broke 
his  skull.  Abimelecli  called  his  armour-bearer  and 
said,  “Draw  thy  sword  and  slay  me,  that  men  say 
not  of  me,  A woman  slew  him.”  So  ended  this  first 
and  not  very  well-sustained  endeavour  to  create  a 
stable  power  in  Israel.  The  incapacity  of  Abimelecli 
was  the  main  cause  of  its  failure.  One  hundred  and 
fifty  or  two  hundred  years  afterwards  a man  arose  who 
combined  the  warlike  heroism  of  Gideon  and  the  bold- 
ness of  his  religious  policy  with  the  wickedness  of 
Abimelech  and  his  talent  for  surrounding  himself  with 
bandits.  David  was  destined  to  prove  a cleverer  and 
more  fortunate  Abimelech.  Jerusalem  was  to  accom- 
plish what  Sichem  could  not  do.  Judah  was  to 
succeed  where  J oseph  failed. 


CEAPTEH  X. 


GILEADITE  LEGENDS. — JEPHTHAH. 

The  tribes  beyond  Jordan,  wbo  were  the  first  estab- 
lished, at  an  epoch  when  the  idea  of  a common  god 
for  all  Israel  hardly  existed,  and  who  had,  more- 
over, little  to  unite  them  with  the  rest  of  Israel,  were 
more  anxious  than  any  of  the  others  to  have  a 
S2iecial  religion.  The  Iahvehists  of  the  west  accused 
them  of  not  belonging  to  the  religion  of  the  rest  of 
Israel.*  The  fact  is  that  these  tribes  had,  beyond 
Jordan,  f an  altar  of  their  own  which  the  puritans 
afterwards  imputed  to  them  as  a crime.  It  was  pro- 
bably the  old  Gilead  (heap  of  witness)^  upon  which 
they  had  offered  up  sacrifices,  libations,  and  feasts 
of  alliance  from  the  most  remote  antiquity.  This 
ancient  holy  place  was  probably  that  which  was  called 
Mispa , or  Mispe- Gilead,  or  Ramot  Mispe , or  Ramot 
Gilead.  There  solemn  oaths  were  taken.  It  was  the 
religious  capital  of  Trans- Jordan. § 

* Joshua,  ch.  xxii. 

f Joshua,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  10,  11. 

I Joshua,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  34. 

§ Judges,  ch.  x.,  v.  17 ; ch.  xi.,  v.  11,  29,  34.  See  Hebrew 
dictionary,  word  Ramoth.  Note  specially  Judges,  ch.  xi.,  v.  11  : 


274  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


The  vast  territory  of  the  eastern  half-tribe  of 
Manasseh,  that  is  to  say  of  Bashan,  was  peopled 
slowly.  This  country  possessed  in  reality  no  civilisa- 
tion before  the  first  century  of  our  era.*'  Here  the 
great  coloniser  was  J air,  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh,  con- 
cerning whom  tradition  varies  in  a singular  manner. 
Some  make  him  out  to  be  a contemporary  of  Moses, 
others  give  him  rank  among  the  Judges.  What  they 
called  Havvoth  lair , “ towns  of  Jair,”  corresponded  to 
the  Gaulonitide  country  east  of  Lake  Genesareth.f 
It  was  a matter  of  doubt  whether  Jair  was  a real 
person  or  a geographical  term.  The  legend  or  play 
upon  words  came  in  here.  These  cities,  thirty  in 
number  (sometimes  there  were  twenty-three  and  some- 
times sixty),  became  thirty  sons  of  Jair,  possessing 
thirty  towns  [aidrim  instead  of  the  ordinary  form 
arim).  These  thirty  aidrim  became  thirty  young 
asses  ( aidrim ),  and  the  legend  spoke  of  thirty  sons  of 
Jair  mounted  on  thirty  asses.  There  were  no  war 
horses  or  riding  horses  in  those  days,  and  asses  were 
looked  upon  as  very  fit  animals  to  ride. 

The  most  celebrated  of  the  legendary  heroes  of 
Gilead  was  Jephthah.  He  was  a bandit,  and  accord- 
ing to  some  the  son  of  a prostitute,  according  to  others 
of  a concubine,  and  consequently  not  in  a condition  to 

mrp  ’'DDb  Ramoth-Gilead  was  situated  near  where  we 

see  the  ruins  of  Gadare  to-day. 

* Waddington,  Inscr.  grecques  et  lat.  de  Syrie,  No.  2329. 

t First  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  iv.,  v.  13;  First  Book  of  Chronicles, 
ch.  ii.,  v.  21 — 28  ; Judges,  ch.  x.,  v.  3 — 5. 


GIL EA DITE  LEGENDS.  — JEPHTHA II. 


275 


share  the  inheritance  with  the  sons  of  his  father.  It 
will  be  remembered  that  such  was  also  the  case  with 
Abimelech,  and  perhaps  with  David.*  Solomon  himself 
was  a natural  son.  People  had  a tendency  to  suppose 
that  there  was  some  irregularity  in  the  geneaology  of 
great  men ; j*  this  rendered  their  good  fortune  all  the 
more  striking.  It  has  been  the  natural  tendency  of  all 
ages  to  make  out  that  their  heroes  were  adventurers. 
Besides,  Israel,  even  in  its  heroic  legend,  did  not  show 
itself  imbued  with  a military  feeling.  The  ideal  warrior 
was  not  the  regular  head  of  the  family,  an  eldest  son 
destined  to  succeed  his  father  ; an  illegitimate  son  was 
supposed  to  inherit  more  of  the  heroism  of  the  race  than 
the  legitimate  sons.  The  military  hero  was  in  general 
an  outcast,  forced  to  consort  with  vagabonds  on  account 
of  being  driven  out  of  ('o  >rs  by  his  family.  The  anta- 
gonism which  reigned  between  peace-loving  Israel  and 
the  professional  soldier  began  to  show  itself  in  this  way. 

Driven  out  by  his  brothers,  Jephthah  settled  in 
the  land  of  Tob,  where  he  became  the  chief  of  a band 
of  adventurers  living  on  plunder.  The  land  of  Tob 
was  the  Ledja,  that  is  to  say  that  bed  of  lava  of  the 
mountain  of  Hor  forming  an  almost  equilateral  tri- 
angle, thirteen  leagues  each  side,  the  recesses  of  which 
have  always  served  as  a refuge  for  outlaws. £ The 
bandit  enjoys  his  revenge  when  he  is  appealed  to  for 

* According  to  some  he  was  descended  from  a poor  Moabite, 
and  to  others  from  Rahab  the  harlot. 

f See  the  clever  remarks  of  St.  Jerome  on  Matthew,  ch.  i.,  v.  5. 

J It  is  the  same  in  our  day. 


276  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


lielp  in  the  hour  of  danger.  The  Ammonites  unceasingly 
threatened  the  Israelites  of  Gideon  and  of  Bashan.  It 
even  appears  that  the  enemy  often  passed  the  Jordan 
and  heat  the  tribes  of  the  west.  An  unusually  tierce 
attack  compelled  the  Gileadites  to  appeal  to  Jephthah, 
who  was  leading  the  life  of  a brigand  in  Ledja.  It 
is  said  that  they  promised  him  the  sovereignty  if  he 
would  deliver  them  from  their  enemies.  Jephthah,  in 
fact,  gained  the  victory  and  drove  the  Ammonites  out 
of  all  the  cities  of  Manasseh,  Gad,  and  Beuben,  which 
they  had  occupied. 

The  popular  songs  of  the  time  attributed  to  this  war 
an  episode  which  gained  a great  celebrity  among  the 
tribes,  and  gave  rise  to  a good  deal  of  poetry.*  “And 
Jephthah  vowed  a vow  unto  the  Lord  and  said,  If 
thou  shalt  without  fail  deliver  the  children  of  Ammon 
into  mine  hands,  then  shall  it  be  that  whatsoever 
cometh  forth  of  the  doors  of  my  house  to  meet  me,  when 
I return  in  peace  from  the  children  of  Ammon,  shall 
surely  be  the  Lord’s,  and  I will  offer  it  up  for  a burnt 
offering.”  And  after  the  victory  Jephthah  came  back 
from  Mispeh  to  his  house,  and  his  daughter  came 
out  to  meet  him  with  timbrels  and  wnth  dances. 
Now  she  was  an  only  daughter  ; an  only  child. 
When  he  saw  her  he  rent  his  garments  and  said, 
“ Alas ! my  daughter,  canst  thou  be  the  cause  of 
my  sadness.  I have  opened  my  mouth  to  Iahveh 
and  I cannot  go  back.”  And  she  said  to  him,  “My 
father,  if  thou  hast  opened  thy  mouth  to  Iahveh, 
* Judges,  cb.  xi.,  v.  80  and  following. 


GILEADITE  LEGENDS— JEPHTHAH.  277 

do  with  me  according  to  that  which  has  proceeded  out 
of  thy  mouth;  forasmuch  as  Ialiveh  has  taken  ven- 
geance for  thee  of  thine  enemies,  even  of  the  children 
of  Ammon.”  And  she  added,  u Grant  me  this : let 
me  alone  two  months  that  I may  go  up  and  down  upon 
the  mountains  and  bewail  my  virginity,  I and  my 
fellows.”  And  he  said,  Go;  and  he  sent  her  away  for 
two  months,  and  she  went  with  her  companions  and 
bewailed  her  virginity  upon  the  mountains.  And  it 
came  to  pass  that  at  the  end  of  two  months  that  she 
returned  unto  her  father  who  did  with  her  according  to 
his  vow  which  he  had  vowed  : and  she  knew  no  man. 
And  it  was  a custom  in  Israel  that  the  daughters  of 
Israel  went  yearly  to  lament  the  daughter  of  J ephthah 
the  Gileadite,  four  days  in  the  year. 

These  ballads,  annually  renewed,  celebrated  the  tra- 
ditional incident  on  every  occasion  with  new  rites 
more  and  more  dramatic.*  The  narrative  which  has 
been  handed  down  to  us  by  the  Book  of  Judges  is  one 
of  the  best  arranged  versions.  The  truth  probably  is 
that  Jephtliah,  before  undertaking  a difficult  war, 
sacrificed  one  of  his  daughters  according  to  the 
barbarous  custom  put  in  practice  on  solemn  occa- 
sions when  the  country  was  in  danger. f Patriarchal 
deism  had  condemned  these  immolations  : Iahveliism, 
with  its  exclusively  national  principle,  was  rather 
favourable  to  them.  Not  many  human  sacrifices  were 

* Compare  the  annual  agadas  upon  the  Passover  among  tha 
Jews  and  the  Persian  Teazies,  &c. 

f Second  Book  of  Kings,  ch.  iii.,  v.  27. 


t;8  HISTORY  OR  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


offered  to  God  nor  to  the  elohim.  The  gods  whom  they 
thought  to  propitiate  by  means  of  human  sacrifices 
were  the  patriot  gods,  Camos  of  the  Moabites,  Iahveh 
of  the  Israelites,  Moloch  of  the  Canaanites,  Melqarth 
of  Carthage. 

Tantum  gentis  amor  potuit  suadere  malorum. 

The  daughter  of  Jephthah  was  probably  not  the 
only  victim  offered  up  to  Iahveh  before  he  became 
more  lenient  in  the  eighth  century.  Besides,  it  would 
be  impossible  to  say,  at  this  distance  of  time,  to  what 
extent  Iahveh  reigned  in  the  hidden  recesses  of  Israel. 
The  narrative  of  the  Book  of  Judges  represents 
Jephthah  as  a servant  of  Iahveh.  Possibly  this  was 
so,  but  if  it  had  been  otherwise  the  writer  would 
not  have  held  different  language,  his  preconceived 
system  being  that  no  victory  could  have  been  gained 
by  Israel  without  the  aid  of  Iahveh.  In  fact,  these 
distinctions,  so  capital  for  us,  were  then  rather 
frivolous.  If  we  could  ask  Jephthah  whether  he 
had  sacrificed  his  daughter  to  Iahveh,  to  Baal,  or  to 
Milik,  he  would  perhaps  have  found  it  difficult  to 
answer. 

Iahveh,  indeed,  became  more  and  more  synonymous 
with  Israel.  It  was  a maxim  that  the  national  god 
should  not  be  distinguished  from  the  nation.*  What 
each  nation  possessed  was  what  had  been  given  to  it  by 
its  god.  The  narrator  of  Judges  makes  Jephthah  thus 
speak  to  the  King  of  Ammon,  “ Wilt  thou  not  possess 
* Inscr.  de  Mesa,  line  12. 


GILEA DITE  LEGENDS.  — JEPHTHA  H. 


279 

that  which  Camos,  thy  god,*  giveth  thee  to  possess  ?j* 
Whomsoever  Iahveh  shall  drive  out  before  us,  them 
will  we  possess.”  This  phrase  rightly  expresses  the 
low  idea  which  the  national  spirit  of  those  little 
tribes  had  led  them  to  form  of  the  divinity.  To 
despoil  the  original  occupants  who  had  cultivated  the 
soil,  in  order  to  hand  over  the  land  to  new-comers, 
objects  of  an  undeserved  preference,  appeared  fair 
play.  In  this  donation  of  the  god  they  saw  a 
definitive  title.  How  much  greater,  more  just,  and 
better  was  the  god  of  the  nomad  who  possessed  no 
land ! 

The  success  of  Jephthah  excited  the  jealousy  of  the 
Ephraimites,  as  that  of  Gideon  had  already  done. 
They  complained  that  they  had  not  been  called  to  the 
war  against  the  Ammonites,  while  it  appears  that  it 
was  they  themselves  who  held  aloof  in  the  hour  of 
danger.  The  Ephraimites  invaded  Gilead,  probably 
close  to  Mispeh,  and  wished  to  burn  the  house  of 
Jephthah;  but  Jephthah  completely  routed  them. 
The  Gileadites  occupied  the  fords  of  the  Jordan,  and 
when  an  Ephraimite  presented  himself  to  pass  made 
him  pronounce  the  word  Shibboleth.  The  Ephraimites 
in  fact  pronounced  the  chuintante  like  a common  us” 
just  as  the  Arabs  do.  Those  who  said  Sibboleth  were 
slain  without  pity. 

Jephthah  after  this  victory  exercised  a certain 

* Slight  inadvertence  of  the  writer,  Camos  being  the  god  of 
Moab. 

t Judges,  ch.  xi.,  v.  24. 


2»o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


amount  of  authority  over  Israel.  But  he  was  only  a 
soldier;  he  had  no  family  or  posterity.  He  did  nothing 
to  make  his  power  last  after  him. 

The  ancient  lists  of  the  J udges  had  been  formed  by 
placing  one  after  the  other  the  names  of  the  oldest  and 
most  eminent  men  wrho  were  remembered  * After 
Jeplithah  came  Ibsan  of  Bethlehem,  f 11  He  had  thirty 
sons  and  thirty  daughters,  whom  he  sent  abroad,  and 
he  took  in  thirty  daughters  for  his  sonsd’J  Abdon, 
the  son  of  Hillel,  had  forty  sons  and  thirty  grand- 
sons, and  they  rode  upon  seventy  asses. § He  was 
buried  at  Birathon,  in  Ephraim,  in  the  mount  of  the 
Amalekites.  These  lists,  full  of  repetitions,  have  all 
the  appearance  of  having  been  learnt  by  heart,  while 
to  aid  the  memory  no  scruple  was  made  about  resort- 
ing to  the  childish  device  of  alliteration  and  punning.|| 

* Judges,  ch.  xii.  The  sub-titles  of  tribes,  such  as  Jair,  Tola, 
&c.,  were  sometimes  used. 

f There  can  be  no  connection  between  this  and  the  greater 
Bethlehem,  Judah  being  scarcely  mentioned  in  the  Book  of 
Judges. 

J Judges,  ch.  xii.,  v.  8 and  following. 

§ See  above,  p.  274. 

||  For  instance,  buried  at  pb'W,  &c. 


CHAPTER  XI. 


THE  DANITES. — MYTH  OF  SAMSON. 

The  combats  against  tlie  Canaanites  of  Hazor,  against 
the  Ammonites,  against  the  Midianites  were  sharp  but 
short.  The  struggle  with  the  Philistines  was  con- 
tinuous. That  energetic  little  band  of  Pelasgians  in 
all  probability*  came  from  Crete,  and  was  a redoubt- 
able neighbour  for  Dan  and  for  Judah. 

Dan  especially  bore  the  wounds  of  this  sword  driven 
into  the  flesh  of  Israel  with  astonishing  courage. 
Entrenched  in  a few  strong  places  situated  between 
Jerusalem  and  the  sea,  the  Danites  were  merely  en- 
camped in  the  country.  It  was  the  least  solidly  es- 
tablished of  all  the  tribes.  It  had  hardly  shaken 
off  its  nomad  existence.  Its  chief  resort  was  the  ma- 
Jiane  or  camp  situated  generally  between  Zorah  and 
Estaol,  but  sometimes  elsewhere.  A malmne  of  this  kind 
was  to  be  seen  to  the  west  of  Kirjath-Jearim.f  The 
Danites  appear  to  have  been  accomplished  brigands ; 
war  was  their  habitual  occupation.  The  land  round  Zo- 
rah and  Estaol  was  a kind  of  battlefield  for  the  Philis- 
tines and  the  Israelites ; the  two  races  were  brought  into 

* Genesis,  ch.  x.,  v.  14  ; Amos,  ch.  ix.,  v.  7 and  following. 

t Judges,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  25  ; ch.  xviii.,  v.  11  and  following. 


iSz  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


such  close  contact  at  this  point  that  sanguinary  con- 
flicts between  them  were  inevitable. 

This  really  epic  state  of  affairs,  which  lasted  several 
centuries,  produced  a cycle  of  stories  a portion  of  which 
alone  has  come  down  to  us  singularly  transformed.* 
A fable  was  woven  round  the  exploits  of  a certain 
man  called  Samson,  the  son  of  Manoali,  of  Zorali,  a 
warrior  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  of  extraordinary  strength, 
lie  took  the  gates  of  a city  on  his  back  and  carried 
them  several  miles.  He  threw  down  a building 
by  laying  hold  of  two  pillars  and  shaking  them. 
He  passed  his  life  in  fighting  against  the  Philistines  of 
his  district,  in  performing  feats  of  strength,  in  riddles, 
in  stratagems.  There  were  episodes  to  excite  astonish- 
ment and  episodes  to  excite  shouts  of  laughter.  His 
strength  lay  in  the  hair  which  covered  his  head.  He 
was  weak  where  women  were  concerned,  and  each  act 
of  treachery  on  their  part  found  him  defenceless.  A 
Philistine  woman  put  him  to  sleep  on  her  knees  and 
cut  off  his  hair.  Made  a slave  and  the  sport  of 
the  Philistines,  he  ended  by  killing  them  and  himself 
with  them. 

All  this  was  related  with  numerous  details  which 
charmed  the  listener.  Samson  was  for  centuries  the 
An  tar  of  the  Israelites.  Afterwards  when  it  became 
a question  of  inserting  the  story  in  Holy  Writ,  a 
story  in  many  respects  little  edifying,  it  was  touched 
up  in  an  extraordinary  way.  The  burlesque  hero 
of  Dan  was  transformed  into  a respectable  judge 
* Judges,  ch.  xiv.,  xv.,  xvi. 


THE  DANITES—MYTH  OF  SAMSON.  283 

of  Israel.  It  was  announced  that  Samson  like  all 
providential  men  was  born  of  a barren  woman.  The 
fact,  originally  of  a naturalist  order,  as  to  his  strength 
lying  in  his  hair  was  explained  by  a vow.  Samson 
was  supposed  to  have  been  nazir.  According  to  the 
vow  no  razor  was  to  shave  his  head.  Through  the 
devices  of  Dalilah  the  vow  was  broken,  and  the  com- 
pact between  Iahveh  and  his  Ilercules  came  to  an  end. 

The  scene  of  the  whole  epic  of  Samson  is  laid  in 
the  vicinity  of  a small  place  called  Beth-Semes,  or  Ir- 
Semes,* * * §  or  Har-Heres,  about  six  leagues  from  Jeru- 
salem. f The  worship  of  the  sun,  Semes , which  was 
the  local  worship  of  that  country,  together  with  the 
name  of  Samson  (diminutive,  like  soliculus,  sun),  gave 
birth  to  surmises  which  must  be  taken  into  account, 
though  too  much  importance  may  easily  be  attached 
to  them.ij:  The  ancient  Hebrews  had  no  taste  for 

pure  mythology.  But  they  were  not  above  trans- 
forming figurative  creations  ill  understood  into  heroic 
anecdotes.  Let  us  suppose  in  the  temple  of  Beth- 
Semes  the  picture  of  the  sun  in  the  shape  of  a head 
surrounded  by  rays  : this  picture  may  well  have  been 
considered  as  the  head  of  a warrior,  whose  strength 
lay  in  his  locks  (his  rays) ; § all  the  more  so  as  the 

* Equivalent  to  Heliopolis. 

f See  Robinson,  ii.,  pp.  324,  325. 

I The  name  D'ltCBIP  can  very  well  come  from  the  root  U'fZ'O 
6 lo’xypo's  (Josephus). 

§ See  curious  heads  of  hair  drawn  by  Doughty,  Doc.  epigr. 
vecueillis  duns  l’ Arable  du  Nord,  pi.  xli. 

X 


z3+  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


sun  was  often  compared  to  a warrior.*  Tlie  Philis- 
tines (Carian  and  Pelasgian)  may  well  have  intro- 
duced the  solar  myths  and  those  of  Ileracles  ; but 
in  order  to  establish  a parallel  between  the  arid 
legends  of  Israel  and  the  mythological  creations  a 
'priori  of  the  Aryans,  it  would  be  necessary  to  have 
some  more  striking  resemblance. 

The  neighbourhood  of  the  Philistines  made  the 
situation  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  intolerable.*!*  The  Phoeni- 
cians of  Jaffa,  on  the  other  side,  prevented  them  from 
possessing  the  fertile  plain  along  the  sea- coast.  The 
people  of  Zorah  and  Estaol  decided  upon  emigrating. 
They  sent  spies  to  study  the  general  situation  of  the 
country  of  Canaan,  and  to  find  some  weak  tribe  whose 
territory  it  would  be  possible  to  seize  upon.  The 
Danite  spies  found  what  they  were  looking  for  at 
Laish,  J situated  on  the  slopes  of  Mount  Hermon,  in 
the  midst  of  streams  descending  from  the  Panium. 
They  there  discovered  a peaceable  population  living 
like  the  Sidonians,  § that  is  to  say,  by  their  labour, 
and  not  dreaming  of  war.  There  was  no  king  in  the 
neighbourhood  to  lend  them  aid,||  and  the  Sidonians, 
their  congeners  and  their  allies,  could  not  defend  them. 
The  distance  from  Laish  to  Sidon  in  a straight  line 
was  not  great,  but  the  almost  impassable  region  of  the 

* Psalm  xix.,  v.  6. 

f Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  34,  and  following;  ch.  xviii.,  v.  1;  Joshua, 
• ch.  xviii.,  v.  3,  47  and  following. 

t To-day,  Tell-el-Kadi. 

§ Judges,  ch,  xviii.,  v.  7. 

||  I thus  understand  the  altered  passage,  v.  7 : for 

Remark  the  form  of  the  y in  the  inscription  of  Siloah. 


THE  DANITES—MYTH  OF  SAMSON.  2S5 

Litani  lay  between  the  two  cities.  The  spies  at  once 
considered  the  fertile  land  of  Laish  as  belonging  to 
their  fellow-countrymen.  An  oracle  of  Iahveh  which 
they  went  to  consult  confirmed  them  in  this  opinion. 
The  details  of  this  curious  consultation  are  recounted  at 
length  in  a page  which  may  be  considered  as  the  most 
precious  sketch  of  the  morality  of  that  distant  epoch.* 

There  dwelt  in  the  mountains  of  Ephraim  a man 
named  Micah,  a name  which  indicates  a special  devo- 
tion to  Ialiveh.f  The  Iahvehism  of  Micah  appears  to 
have  resembled  that  of  Gideon.  Like  Gideon,  Micah 
had  in  his  house  an  oracle  of  Iahveh  which  brought 
a good  deal  of  custom.  His  enemies,  either  then  or 
later,  spread  the  report  that  the  images  were  made 
with  money  which  had  been  stolen,  and,  what  is  worse, 
with  money  stolen  by  a son  from  his  mother,  with 
silver  labouring  under  the  maternal  curse.  However 
that  may  be,  Micah  had  in  his  house  an  ephod  and  a 
teraphimj  in  wood  and  in  metal,  that  is  to  say,  a com- 
plete “ house  of  God  ” like  that  of  Shiloh. 

It  was  necessary  to  have  a priest  for  this  temple. 
Eor  this  Micah  first  ordained  one  of  his  sons,  but  he 
soon  conceived  scruples.  It  was,  in  fact,  understood 
that  divine  service  could  be  performed  only  by  one  of 
those  persons,  belonging  to  no  tribe,  who  wandered 
among  the  Israelites,  and  who  were  called  Levites. 

* Judges,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  13  and  following. 

+ If  this  name  be  not  altered,  the  meaning  is  “ Who  is  like 
Iahveh  ? ” Remark  also  the  Iahvehist  theophore  names  in  the 
family  of  Gideon. 

J This  word  is  used  in  the  singular,  First  Book  of  Samuel, 
eh.  xix.,  v.  13,  16. 


286  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 


One  day  one  of  these  Levites  passed  through  the 
village  where  Micah  dwelt.  He  was  a young  man  of 
Bethlehem  of  Judah.  Like  all  the  Levites,  he  was 
attached  to  a tribe,  but  he  was  almost  a stranger  to  it.* 
He  left  Bethlehem,  where  he  had  no  means  of  existence, 
in  quest  of  a place  where  he  would  he  paid  to  act  as 
priest  and  soothsayer.  Micah  received  him,  hailed 
him  father  and  priest,  gave  him  ten  shekels  a day 
besides  food  and  raiment,  and  took  him  to  live  in  his 
house.  Then  Micah  said,  “ How  know  I that  the 
Lord  will  do  me  good  seeing  that  I have  a Levite  for 
my  priest.”  The  oracle  acquired  great  notoriety  and 
was  very  profitable  to  Micah. 

How  it  happened  that  the  spies  of  Dan,  crossing  the 
mountains  of  Ephraim,  heard  of  the  oracle  of  Micah 
and  wished  to  consult  it  as  to  the  good  or  evil  issue  of 
their  undertaking.  The  Levite  set  the  machine  in 
motion  and  came  out,  saying,  “ The  thing  is  before 
Iahveh.”  The  spies  returned  quickly  and  told  this  to 
their  fellow-countrymen.  An  emigration  was  decided 
upon.  Six  hundred  men  set  out  from  Zorah  and 
Estaol  with  their  arms,  their  families,  and  their  flocks. 
They  halted  at  Kirjath-Jearim,  and  perhaps  sojourned 
there.  The  emigrants  afterwards  ascended  the  moun- 
tains of  Ephraim  and  arrived  at  the  house  of  Micah. 
The  spies  who  had  consulted  the  oracle  then  gave  them 
a curious  piece  of  advice ; it  was  to  steal  the  instru- 
ments of  worship,  the  ephod , the  teraphim , the  fesel , 
the  masseka , and  to  carry  them  away,  seeing  that  in 

* Judges,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  7 ; ch.  xviii.,  v.  30. 


THE  DANITES— MYTH  OF  SAMSON. 


287 


the  new  settlement  they  were  about  to  found  they 
would  have  no  sacred  vessels.  The  Levite  made  some 
objections  at  first,  hut  they  pointed  out  to  him  that  it 
would  he  better  to  he  the  father  and  priest  of  a tribe 
of  Israel  than  of  one  man.  lie  carried  off  the  ephod, , 
the  teraphim , the  fesel,  the  masseka , and  took  his  place 
in  the  middle  of  the  band. 

The  children,  the  cattle,  and  the  baggage  were 
placed  in  front,  for  they  expected  to  be  attacked  in  the 
rear.  In  fact,  when  Micah  and  his  neighbours  who 
worshipped  Iahveh  at  his  religious  establishment  saw 
that  the  image  had  been  stolen,  they  set  out  in  pursuit 
of  the  Danites  with  great  cries.  u What  aileth  thee 
that  thou  comest  with  such  a company  ? ” asked  the 
Danites.  And  Micah  said,  “ Ye  have  taken  away  my 
gods  which  I made,  and  the  priest,  and  ye  are  gone 
away  : and  what  have  I more  ? and  what  is  this  that 
ye  say  unto  me,  What  aileth  thee  ? And  the  children 
of  Dan  said  unto  him,  Let  not  thy  voice  be  heard 
among  us  lest  angry  fellows  run  upon  thee  and  thou 
lose  thy  life  with  the  lives  of  thy  household.  And 
the  children  of  Dan  went  their  way  ; and  when  Micah 
saw  that  they  were  too  strong  for  him  he  turned  and 
went  hack  unto  his  house.” 

The  march  of  the  children  of  Dan  through  the 
tribes  of  Israel  was  accomplished  without  difficulty, 
and  it  was  the  same  with  the  conquest  of  Laish.  The 
Canaanites  of  these  countries  were  peaceful  and  con- 
fiding people ; they  had  little  to  say  to  the  kings  and 
Bedouin  tribes  by  whom  they  were  surrounded,  and 


288  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


Sidon  was  too  far.  They  were  all  massacred  and  their 
city  was  burned.  This  was  odious  in  the  extreme. 
But  there  is  not  a race  whose  anoestors  have  behaved 
better. 

It  appears  that  the  Danites  had  first  of  all  the  inten- 
tion of  recommencing  their  nomad  life,  but  the  beauty 
and  richness  of  the  country  made  them  change  their 
minds.  They  gave  up  robbery,  rebuilt  the  city  and 
called  it  Dan.  They  installed  there  the  ephod  and 
the  images  which  they  had  taken  from  Micah.  A 
Levite  priesthood  was  established  there  for  the  service 
of  the  ephod,  and,  by  dint  of  imposture,  they  succeeded 
in  gaining  over  Gershom,  a pretended  son  of  Moses.* 
This  lasted  as  long  as  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  The 
other  Israelites  abhorred  the  worship  of  the  Danites  of 
the  north.  They  called  the  sacred  image  of  Dan  u the 
fesel  which  Micah  had  made.”  They  opposed  to  it, 
with  all  the  pride  of  orthodoxy,  the  ark  which  was 
then  at  Shiloh. f 

Laish  was  no  doubt  not  the  only  point  of  the  region 
round  Lake  Hulek  occupied  by  the  Danites. £ As  for 
the  Danites  of  the  south  they  almost  entirely  disap- 
peared. All  the  energetic  portion  of  the  tribe  went 
north  ; what  remained  ended  by  becoming  absorbed  in 
the  tribe  of  J udah. 

* Judges,  ch.  xvii.,  v.  7 ; ch.  xviii.,  v.  30.  On  the  addition  of  3 
in  niPE,  see  Bertheau  or  any  other  commentator. 

t Judges,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  31. 

| The  name  of  the  Danite  city  Saalbin  is  to  be  found  again  in  a 
striking  manner  in  the  present  village  of  Schalaboun  (see  Mission 
de  Phenicie,  pp.  677  and  following). 


CHAPTER  XII. 


THE  CIVIL  WARS  OF  THE  TRIBES. 

It  will  be  seen  that  not  one  of  the  wars  of  which  we 
have  spoken  was  general ; not  one  chieftainship  estab- 
lished by  war  extended  to  the  whole  of  Israel.  The 
children  of  Joseph  often  joined  the  tribes  of  the  north  ; 
Gilead  formed  a distinct  division ; J udah  hardly  ever 
ranged  itself  with  the  tribes,  and  is  rarely  mentioned 
in  the  Book  of  Judges.  Judah  was  scarcely  comprised 
in  the  generic  denomination  of  Israel. 

The  existence  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  was  also 
very  peculiar.  Its  territory  was  small  and  almost 
entirely  occupied  by  the  Canaanites,  either  allies  like 
the  Gibeonites  or  enemies  like  the  Jebusites.  The 
Benjamites  were  little  else  than  a special  military 
corps,  of  a high  cast  as  regards  the  use  of  the  sling, 
their  young  men  being  accustomed  to  use  the  left 
hand  instead  of  the  right.  Their  strong  place  was 
Gibeah,  to  the  north  of  J erusalem.  They  were  not 
liked,  and  their  morality  was  said  to  be  very  low. 
The  following  adventure  was  related  with  horror : * 

A Levite  of  Ephraim,  overtaken  by  nightfall  when 
near  Gibeah,  left  the  road  with  his  concubine  to  pass 
* Judges,  ch.  xix.,  xx.,  xxi. 


29o  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


into  the  city,  and  sat  down  in  the  street.  No  one 
invited  them  in  until  an  old  man,  who  was  a stranger 
to  the  city,  took  them  to  his  house.  What  happened 
then  was  monstrous  and  resembled  the  infamies  of 
Sodom.  It  became  necessary  to  hand  over  the  concu- 
bine to  the  Benjamites.  After  having  satisfied  their 
lust  during  a night  of  debauch,  the  unfortunate  woman 
fell  dead  at  the  threshold  of  the  house  where  her 
husband  had  received  hospitality.  The  Levite  on 
opening  the  door  in  the  morning  found  the  dead  body, 
placed  it  on  his  ass,  and  on  reaching  home  cut  it  into 
twelve  pieces,  which  he  sent  to  the  twelve  tribes  of 
Israel. 

It  was  very  general  in  ancient  times  for  great  wars  to 
be  attributed  to  trivial  causes,  and  sometimes  these 
details,  which  appear  surprising  to  us,  were  true.  The 
affair  of  the  Levite  of  Ephraim  was,  we  are  assured,  the 
occasion  of  a general  assembly  of  the  nation  at  Mispeh, 
near  Jerusalem,  and  of  a sort  of  federal  war  against 
Benjamin.  It  is  probable  that  there  was  some  more 
serious  cause  for  this  attack.  Nearly  all  the  tribes 
hated  Benjamin.  It  is  said  that  a great  many  Israel- 
ites swore  at  Mispeh  never  to  give  their  daughters  to 
a Benjamite.  The  oracle  of  the  ark,*  several  times 
consulted,  recommended  a war  of  extermination. 

The  rock  of  Gibeah  resisted  heroically.  The  sallies 
made  by  the  Benjamites  were  very  deadly,  and 
the  Israelites  only  succeeded  in  taking  the  place  by 

* According  to  Judges,  ch.  xx.,  v.  26,  27,  the  ark  was  then  at 
Bethel.  It  was  probably  at  Shiloh. 


THE  CIVIL  WARS  OF  THE  TRIBES. 


29 1 


surprise.  They  placed  men  in  ambush  near  the  city  ; 
then  by  a pretended  flight  they  drew  the  besieged 
away  from  the  place.  The  men  in  ambush  then  took 
the  city,  and  massacred  every  one  in  it  and  set  it  on 
fire.  The  Benjamites  who  were  disseminated  in  the 
plain,  turning  round,  saw  the  smoke  going  up  to 
heaven.  In  their  despair  they  fled  into  the  desert. 
The  confederates  pursued  them  and  killed  them  by 
thousands.  * 

At  Sela-Bimmonj*  the  fugitives  defended  them- 
selves for  four  months.  At  the  end  of  that  time  the 
wrath  of  the  tribes  was  appeased  and  the  Benjam- 
ites were  allowed  to  escape.  It  was  supposed  that  all 
the  women  of  Benjamin  had  been  exterminated.  In 
order  to  procure  wives  for  the  survivors  of  Sela-Rim- 
mon,  and  not  leave  a void  among  the  tribes,  the 
Israelites  resorted  to  the  most  primitive  devices.^:  The 
legend  had  certainly  exaggerated  the  extermination 
of  Gibeah.  Benjamin,  far  from  disappearing,  was 
soon  to  give  Israel  its  first  king;  Gibeah  was  destined 
to  become  the  city  of  Saul,  and  within  its  walls  was  to  be 
exercised  for  the  first  time  a central  power  in  Israel. 

A federal  execution,  similar  to  that  which  punished 
Benjamin,  is  said  to  have  fallen  upon  the  city  of 
Gabesh-Gilead.  According  to  the  legend,  the  inhabit- 
ants of  that  city  alone  were  absent  from  the  sort  of 
diet  held  at  Mispeh ; they  were  all  slain  with  the 

* The  exaggeration  of  this  account  will  be  remarked. 

f To-day  Rummon,  two  leagues  N.N.E.  of  Toleil-el-Foul. 

I Judges,  ch.  xxi. 


292  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


exception  of  the  virgins,  who  were  reserved  to  perpe- 
tuate the  race  of  Benjamin.  What  is  true  in  this 
story  is  that  Gilead,  or  perhaps  Jabesh  in  particular, 
lived  apart,  and  entered  for  very  little  into  the  common 
work  of  Israel. 

Thus  continued  during  two  or  three  centuries  the 
distinct  life  of  a dozen  families  notoriously  of  the 
same  race,  fully  aware  of  their  relationship,  hut  rarely 
united  in  a common  action.  The  children  of  Joseph 
always  maintained  their  superiority.  The  signs  of 
the  future  supremacy  of  Judah  were  still  very 
obscure.*  Genealogies  had  been  established  at  a 
very  early  date,  destined  to  show  the  unity  of  origin 
of  the  different  families.  The  ancient  names  of  tribes, 
Isaac,  Jacob,  Israel,  Joseph,  allowed  of  ingenious 
combinations,  at  the  head  of  which  always  figured  the 
High  Father,  the  Ab-ram , identical  with  the  Pere- 
Orcham , brought  from  Chaldoea.  The  very  old  name  of 
Isaac  furnished  a son  and  immediate  successor  to  the 
Ab-ram.  The  ancient  names  of  Jacob  and  Israel  were 
considered  as  one.  All  the  tribes  descended  from  sup- 
posed sons  of  Jacob  or  Israel.  It  is  true  that  there 
was  something  arbitrary  in  this  choice.  The 
powerful  groups  of  Jair,  of  Machir,  of  Abiezer  had 
quite  as  much  right  as  Gad  or  Dan  to  figure  in  this 
list.j* 

If  not  too  critical,  we  can  make  up  the  sacra- 
mental number  of  “ twelve.”  Joseph  was  counted 

* Judges,  ch.  xx.,  v.  18 ; Genesis,  ch.  xlix.,  v.  8 and  following. 

f Machir  figures  as  a tribe  in  the  Song  of  Deborah. 


THE  CIVIL  WARS  OF  THE  TRIBES. 


293 


double  in  the  persons  of  his  two  sons,  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh.  Two  divisions  were  formed,  it  ap- 
pears, irrespective  of  relationship,  the  division  of 
Levites  and^the  warrior  division,  known  by  the  name 
of  Benjamin.  The  Levites  had  greatly  multiplied  in 
various  tribes.  People  became  accustomed  to  believe 
that  they  were  descended  from  a son  of  Jacob  named 
Levi ; they  were  called  a tribe  but  they  dwelt  with 
other  tribes  and  at  their  expense.  The  Beni-Jemini , 
skilful  archers  and  slingers,  were  placed  on  the  tops  of 
the  lofty  hills  to  the  north  of  Jerusalem. 

Thus  Benjamin  and  Levi  became  two  sons  of  Jacob, 
although  the  different  Levites  who  wandered  through 
the  country  were  not  bound  by  any  parental  tie. 
As  the  use  and  skill  in  handling  certain  weapons  after- 
wards became,  in  antiquity,  the  appanage  of  special 
families,  who  handed  them  down  from  father  to  son, 
it  cannot  be  asserted  that  the  Beni-Jemini  did  not 
originally  form  a family  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the 
word.  At  all  events  it  was  admitted  that  a tribe 
could  exist  without  territory.  Levi  had  none,  and  the 
territory  of  Benjamin  was  confined  almost  exclusively 
to  the  hill  of  Gibeah. 

Beuben  and  Simeon,  whom  it  was  soon  difficult  to 
discern  from  Moab,  Edom,  and  the  Arabs  of  the 
desert,  disappeared  at  an  early  period  as  tribes.  They 
were  considered,  like  that  of  Levi,  as  sporadic  tribes 
dispersed  through  the  rest  of  Israel.  There  were  thus 
tribes  in  some  measure  ideal  alongside  of  tribes 
totally  disinherited,  like  Dan.  The  chief  thing  was 


294  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


to  ally  oneself  by  tongue,  by  race,  or  by  some 
link  more  or  less  antbentic  to  the  venerable  Jacob 
of  antiquity. 

Jacob  was  supposed  to  have  had  two  wives  and  two 
concubines.  Each  tribe  naturally  endeavoured  to 
trace  its  descent  from  the  common  father  in  the 
manner  the  most  honourable.  Then  a kind  of  classi- 
fication was  made,  favourable  to  some,  unfavourable 
to  others,  in  which  the  opinion  of  the  powerful  tribe 
of  Joseph  preponderated.  Joseph  and  Benjamin,  of 
the  oldest  aristocracy  of  Israel,  were  born  of  the 
dearly- beloved  wife  Bachel,  under  circumstances 
which  made  them  privileged  and  favourites.  Dan, 
Naphthali,  Gad,  and  Asher  were  sacrificed  and  made 
to  descend  from  the  concubines.  As  there  was  a 
great  deal  of  rivalry  between  the  members  of  this 
family,  anecdotes,  often  ill-natured,  were  circulated 
with  regard  to  the  true  or  supposed  sons  of  the 
patriarch,  and  greatly  afflicted  their  descendants.  In 
the  same  way,  in  those  country  places  where  people 
are  still  simple-minded,  they  annoy  one  another  by 
abusing  the  saints  of  one  another’s  parishes.  But 
it  was  chiefly  among  the  Arab  tribes,  before  Mahomet, 
in  the  Kitab-el-Aghani , in  the  divans  of  the  tribes, 
that  one  must  look  for  the  intelligence  of  this  age,  in 
appearance  so  contradictory,  in  Israel.  The  Arab 
tribes,  although  of  the  same  race,  hate  each  other 
cordially,  and  spread  abroad  the  most  odious  calum- 
nies about  one  another.  A collection  has  been  made* 

* The  Pidilian- el-alb db  in  the  Journal  asiatique,  June,  1853. 


THE  CIVIL  WARS  OF  THE  TRIBES. 


295 


in  which  these  inventions,  sometimes  obscene,  are 
compared,  embittered  and  commented  on. 

The  love  and  the  hatred  of  the  tribes  were  also 
expressed  in  Israel  in  burning  and  passionate  epi- 
grams. Sayings  sometimes  flattering,  sometimes  sati- 
rical, were  circulated  concerning  each  tribe.  These 
sayings  have  been  handed  down  to  us  in  the  shape  of 
blessings  pronounced  by  Jacob*  or  by  Moses,  f They 
are  full  of  originality,  although  obscure,  tampered 
with,  often  unintelligible,  based  upon  untranslateable 
puns. 

Zebulun  shall  dwell  at  the  haven  of  the  sea ; and  he  shall  be  for 
an  haven  for  ships;  and  his  border  shall  be  unto  Zidon. 

Issachar  is  a strong  ass  couching  down  between  two  burdens. 

* * * * * 

That  age  of  gold  which  became  for  Israel  a kind  of 
second  ideal  was  never  forgotten — the  patriarchal 
ideal  belonging  to  the  pastoral  life ; the  ideal  of  the 
times  of  the  Judges  belonging  to  an  agricultural  and 
settled  life.  Those  days  were  represented  as  an  epoch 
of  gaiety,  of  intermittent  happiness,  of  pure  morality 
often,  of  liberty  always,  when  the  individual,  master 
of  his  land,  not  exposed  to  the  abuses  of  a monarchy, 
lived  in  the  state  nearest  to  perfection,  which  was 
the  primitive  nomad  state.  As  Israel  never  had  any 
real  love  of  royalty,  this  recollection  of  an  era  of 

* Genesis,  ch.  xlix. 

T Deuteronomy,  ch.  xxxiii.  Compare  with  the  SoDg  of 
Deborah. 


296  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


the  absence  of  government  and  of  supposed  theocracy 
always  enchanted  his  imagination.  A cycle  of 
delicious  pastorals  was  embroidered  on  this  pleasant 
and  tranquil  canvass.  The  book  of  the  Wars  of 
Iahveh  and  the  Jasher  afterwards  absorbed  nearly  all 
those  anecdotes,  to  which  a happy  mixture  of  idyllism 
and  heroism  gave  a charm  that  the  epic  poems  of  the 
Greeks  and  the  Kitdb-el-Aghdni  of  the  Arabs  alone 
have  equalled. 

The  Book  of  Judges  inherited  that  flowery  style  of 
poetry  which  the  pietist  proclivities  of  later  ages  did 
not  destroy.  This  portion  of  the  ancient  historio- 
graphy was  very  little  touched  up.  The  episodes  of 
Gideon,  of  Jcphtliah,  of  Samson,  of  Micah,  of  the 
Levite  of  Ephraim  are  admirable  pictures,  simple 
and  grand,  of  remote  antiquity,  quite  equal  to  the 
finest  Homeric  productions.  A number  of  episodes  of 
the  same  kind  relating  to  Caleb  and  to  the  heroes  of 
the  south  are  lost.  Others  were  manufactured  at  a 
later  period  and  appended  at  Bethlehem  to  the  family 
of  David.*  Upon  reaching  a more  advanced  state  of 
organisation,  Israel  represented  to  itself  that  age 
as  one  when  it  was  happy,  when  at  least  it  was  young 
and  free.  This  gave  rise  to  an  exquisite  romantic 
vein. 

Bomance  requires,  in  order  to  locate  its  dreams,  a 
country  and  an  epoch  which  lend  themselves  to  fiction 
and  furnish  it  with  a luminous  background  which 
floods  the  picture  in  a kind  of  mirage.  As  among 


* Book  of  Butk. 


THE  CIVIL  WARS  OF  THE  TRIBES. 


297 


the  Arabs  every  anecdote  was  ascribed  to  the  time 
of  Ilaroun-al-Rasckid,  and  as  in  the  Middle  Ages 
every  tale  which  related  to  the  time  of  King  John  was 
allowed  a peculiar  licence ; even  so  it  was  sufficient 
to  write  at  the  head  of  a story,  u How  it  happened  in 
the  days  when  the  Judges  judged  Israel,”  or,  “ It  was 
an  ancient  custom  in  Israel  in  the  days  of  the 
Judges,”  to  create  for  it  a poetic  halo,  and  for  the 
mind  to  be  prepared  for  idyls  and  for  tales  untram- 
meled by  pietism.  Every  licence  was  atoned  for  if 
the  passages  which  shocked  modem  piety  were  ter- 
minated by  this  formula:  u And  in  those  days  there 
was  no  king  over  Israel,  and  every  one  did  as  seemed 
good  in  his  own  eyes.”  The  time  of  the  Judges  thus 
became  a continuation,  as  it  were,  of  that  of  the 
patriarchs.  The  Book  of  Ruth  is  one  of  those  rare 
pearls  of  literature  where  the  simple  expression  of  the 
reality  suffices  to  shed  over  the  whole  story  a flood  of 
soft  and  glowing  light. 

It  is  here  that  the  Homer  of  the  Greeks  and  that 
the  Arab  cycle  is  surpassed.  Hot  a shadow  of  literary 
effort ; one  grain  of  the  most  innocent  fiction  being 
sufficient  for  the  ideal.  Ho  law  but  that  dictated  by 
the  vague  elohim.  Ruth  and  Boaz  are  immortalised 
alongside  of  Hausicaa  and  Alcinous.  The  further 
humanity  recedes  from  primitive  life  the  more  pleasure 
it  finds  in  these  charming  contrasts  of  modesty  and 
artlessness,  in  manners  at  once  simple  and  refined, 
when  man,  without  obeying  any  superior  authority, 
or  law,  or  city,  or  king,  or  emperor,  or  religion,  or 


298  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


priest,  lived  nobler,  greater,  stronger,  than  when  fet- 
tered by  a thousand  conventions,  and  when  moulded 
by  successive  centuries  of  discipline. 

Thanks  to  the  Homeric  poems,  we  have  the  picture 
of  the  life  of  the  Greek  tribes  at  an  epoch  parallel  to 
that  of  the  Judges.  The  analogy  is  striking.  Although 
separated  by  a gulf  in  all  that  relates  to  ethnography 
and  geography,  the  Grecian  and  the  Israelite  tribes 
bore  stamped  on  their  foreheads  the  same  marks  of 
poetic  childhood.  The  Greek  believed  in  a greater 
number  of  divinities  more  entirely  distinct  than  the 
Israelite.  But  their  moral  condition  differed  little. 
The  divine  intervention  in  matters  human  and  natural 
was  continuous.  Their  ideas  concerning  sacrifice 
were  nearly  the  same.  The  Greek  God,  however, 
identified  himself  more  with  his  hiereus  than  the 
God  of  Israel  with  his  cohen.  The  idea  of  a tute- 
lary deity,  again,  was  stronger  among  the  Greeks 
than  among  the  Israelites.  The  God  of  Israel 
was  capable  of  becoming  a universal  God,  and  this 
cannot  be  said  of  the  Grecian  gods,  even  of  Jupiter. 
One  feels  that  Jupiter  will  never  be  able  to  kill  his 
fellows,  while  Iahveh  was  destined  soon  to  have  no 
rival. 

The  ideas  concerning  oracles  were  the  same  with 
both  races.  The  oath,  especially  that  of  extermina- 
tion, the  herein , was  more  terrible  among  the  Israelites ; 
and  therein  lay  a very  dangerous  germ  of  fanaticism. 
Human  sacrifices  were,  with  both,  the  sporadic  rem- 
nant of  an  anterior  evil.  There  was  little  difference 


THE  CIVIL  WARS  OF  THE  TRIBES. 


299 


of  religion ; no  temple,*  hardly  any  vessels  of  worship, 
the  sacrifice  was  not  separated  from  the  religious  feast ; 
the  share  of  the  gods  was  set  apart  in  a set  form. 

The  morality  of  the  Hebrew  in  the  days  of  the 
Judges,  and  of  the  Achean  in  the  Homeric  days,  was 
much  the  same.  The  state  of  society  was  brigandage, 
and  the  hand  of  every  tribe  against  his  neighbour. 
Internally,  the  tie  which  bound  each  tribe  within 
itself  was  very  strong.  A Danite  would  never  slay  a 
Danite,  he  would  always  revenge  him ; but  a Danite 
would  ill-treat  a Zebulonite.  However,  two  Israelites 
would  begin  by  recognising  a bond  of  fraternity 
between  them.  As  for  a person  who  was  not  an 
Israelite,  every  member  of  the  family  of  Israel  would 
see  in  him  an  enemy.  It  was  the  same  with  the 
Greek  tribes.  The  innate  gentleness  and  humanity 
to  be  found  in  noble  races  already  inspired  some  rules 
which  the  gods  laid  to  heart.  The  gods  were  not 
very  earnest  in  their  efforts  to  make  good  prevail,  but 
still  they  did  so  in  a way,  and  there  were  crimes  which 
they  punished  with  penalties  inflicted  in  this  life. 
The  souls  of  the  dead  were  underground,  in  gloomy 
places,  leading  a life  which  greatly  resembled  nothing- 
ness. Sometimes  they  were  successfully  summoned 
up  from  there  by  giving  them  blood  to  drink.  Was 
there  any  difference  in  their  lot  according  to  their 

* The  temple  among  the  Greeks  was  still  only  the  high  place, 
t €fx.€vos  and  fiw/jos  (lama,  Hebrew  and  Phoenician).  Cf.  especially 
Iliad,  viii.,  48;  xxiii.,  148;  Odyssey, v ii.,  3G3.  See  fine  reflection 
of  Socrates,  Xenophon,  Mem.,  III.,  viii.,  10. 

Y 


3oo  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

more  or  less  guilt  or  innocence  ? The  tendency  to  be- 
lieve in  reward  and  punishment  beyond  the  tomb  was 
much  deeper  with  the  Greeks  than  with  the  Israelites. 
One  feels  that,  the  idea  of  justice  once  awakened,  the 
Israelite  would  like  to  see  that  justice  rendered  in  this 
world,  and  that  the  Greek  would  more  easily  console 
himself  for  the  iniquities  committed  here  below  with 
the  dreams  of  the  F lice  do. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


PROGRESS  OF  THE  RELIGIOUS  AND  POLITICAL  ORGANISATION 
OF  SAMUEL. 

The  period  of  the  history  of  Israel  which  we  have 
just  studied  has  no  precise  chronology.  It  is  about 
1100  b.c.  that  we  commence  to  catch  a glimpse  of  a 
series  of  facts  which  henceforward  unrolled  themselves 
without  interruption.  Through  a thousand  hesitations 
a real  progress  began  to  appear.  Israel  commenced  to 
organise  itself  and  to  unite.  Mispeli,  the  culminating 
point  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  became  the  meeting 
place  of  the  tribes,  the  Washington  of  the  Israelite 
federation.*  This  mountain,  which  rises  nearly  4,000 
feet  above  the  level  of  the  sea,  on  the  horizon  of  J eru- 
salem,  was  not  made  to  serve  as  the  site  of  a great 
city.j*  On  the  contrary,  it  was  an  excellent  spot  for 
those  federal  diets  which  were  soon  to  assume  a sacred 
character.  The  ark  was  never  established  there ; but 
the  sofet  was  induced  to  make  it  his  habitual  residence, 
and  no  doubt  the  political  importance  of  Mispeh  had 
some  weight  in  the  providential  selection  of  Jerusalem 
for  such  brilliant  destinies.  Jerusalem  is  only  a league 

* Judges,  ch.  xx.,  1,  8;  ch.  xxi.,v.  1,  5,  8. 
f Robinson,  i.,  p.  457  and  following. 

Y 2 


302  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


from  Mi  spell  and  from  the  top  of  the  mountain  the 
little  acropolis  (millo)  of  the  Jebusites  on  the  hill  of 
Sion  must  have  been  visible. 

The  power  of  the  J udges  increased  every  day.  The 
relations  of  the  tribes  between  each  other  were  more 
closely  cemented ; the  idea  of  the  unity  of  Israel 
gathered  shape.  Iahvehism  became  more  and  more  the 
national  religion.  It  is  probable  that  the  broad  lines 
of  sacred  history  were  already  traced  in  the  Israelite 
mind  without  being  written.  The  Israelites  said  to 
themselves  that  Iahveli  had  saved  them  from  Egypt 
and  had  promised  them  the  full  possession  of  the  land 
of  Canaan.  The  art  of  writing  began  to  spread ; 
no  books  were  composed,  but  many  things,  for  which  the 
old  mnemonic  system  had  till  then  sufficed,  were  hence- 
forth traced  in  the  clear  and  simple  characters  which 
the  Sidonians  found  so  useful. 

Shiloh  became,  at  the  same  time,  a kind  of  religious 
capital  for  the  nation.*  Iahveh  alone  appears  to  have 
been  worshipped  there.  The  ark,  after  a long  sojourn 
at  Bethel,  had  been  removed  there,  and  every  one  went 
thither  to  consult  the  oracle.  There  were  annual 
festivals,  a kind  of  pilgrimage.  People  flocked  to 
Shiloh  as  to  a holy  city  from  all  parts  of  Israel.  This 
was  an  immense  step  in  advance.  In  Israel  the  ark 
was  the  centre  of  all  movement,  the  initial  cell  of  the 
organisation  of  the  future,  which  in  embryogeny  is  the 
first  development  of  life.  It  was  at  Shiloh  that  the 
importance  which  this  chest  would  have  on  the  unity 
* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  i.,  ii.,  iii.,  especially  ch.  iii.,  v.  21. 


THE  ORGANISATION  OF  SAMUEL . 


3°3 


of  the  nation  first  became  apparent.  It  was,  in  short, 
the  essential  factor,  for  if  there  were  numerous  ephods 
and  numerous  places  of  sacrifice,  there  was  never  more 
than  one  ark ; and  this  was  why  there  was  afterwards 
but  one  temple.  The  presence  of  the  ark  at  Shiloh 
did  not,  however,  prevent  Iahveh  from  being  con- 
sulted at  Mispeh  and  at  Gilgal.* 

It  is  not  probable  that  the  ark  was  as  richly  deco- 
rated then  as  in  the  days  of  Solomon.  No  doubt  the 
wood  of  which  it  was  constructed  was  several  times 
renewed.  The  sphinxes,  or  hawks  with  folded  wings, 
never  ceased  to  adorn  the  lid.  If  gold  had  been  used 
with  the  profusion  described  by  modern  writers  the 
little  sanctuary  would  have  been  in  great  danger  at 
an  epoch  when  the  land  of  Israel  was  so  ill  protected 
against  robbers.  Nor  do  we  find  that  the  tent  in 
which  the  portable  naos  was  deposited  ever  received 
any  remarkable  ornaments.  But  the  priesthood  as- 
sumed importance.  Eli,  priest  of  Shiloh,  was  for  forty 
years  a kind  of  judge.  His  two  sons,  Phineas  and 
Hophni,  began  the  era  of  imposition.  Long  did  Israel 
remember  the  three-pronged  flesh-hooks  which  they 
plunged  into  the  cauldrons  and  pots  of  the  poor  people 
who  went  there  to  sacrifice.  It  was  also  related  that 
Hophni  and  Phineas  profaned  the  sacred  tent  with  the 
women  who  served  there.  The  result  was  that  for  the 
moment  the  pilgrimage  to  Shiloh  fell  into  discredit. f 

* Judges,  ch.  xx.  and  xxi.  ; First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  vii.,  v.  5 
and  following. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  ii.,  v.  12  and  following. 


3o4  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

The  new  ideas,  however,  made  their  way  in  spite  of 
everything,  with  the  childlike  logic  of  primitive  ages. 
It  was  imagined  that  by  taking  the  ark  into  battle 
against  the  Philistines  victory  would  declare  itself  for 
Israel,  and  in  a war  they  removed  it  from  Shiloh  to 
the  camp  near  Afeq.  Contrary  to  their  anticipation, 
the  Israelites  were  beaten ; the  ark  was  captured  and 
taken  to  Asdod.  According  to  custom*  the  Philis- 
tines placed  it  as  a trophy  in  the  temple  of  their  god 
Dagon.  Then,  again,  the  superstition  common  to  all 
the  people  of  antiquity  made  them  believe  that  certain 
maladies  were  caused  by  the  presence  of  this  piece  of 
sacred  furniture  among  them.  They  sent  it  to  Beth- 
Semes,  in  the  land  of  Israel,  placing  it  in  the  field  of  a 
man  called  Joshua.  Iahveh  was  then  rather  an  object 
of  terror  than  of  love.  Joshua  was  seized  with  fear, 
and  proposed  to  the  men  of  Kirjath-Jearim  to’ receive 
this  terrible  guest.  The  men  of  Kirjath-Jearim  came 
and  took  the  ark  and  brought  it  into  the  house  of 
Abinadab,  who  dwelt  on  a hill,  and  who  sanctified 
Eleazar  his  son  to  keep  it.  It  appears  to  have  re- 
mained at  that  place  for  twenty  years,  f 

The  priesthood  of  Shiloh  had  a certain  tendency  to 
become  hereditary.  In  thirty  years’  time  we  shall 
find  the  ephod  in  the  hands  of  the  great-grandson  of 
Eli.  The  ephod , that  is  to  say  the  divining  machine, 

* Inscr.  de  Mesa,  lines  12,  18,  18. 

f First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  iv,,  v.  1 and  following;  ch.  xiv.,  v. 
18.  The  text  of  this  passage  must  have  been  altered.  Compare 
Greek. 


THE  ORGANISATION  OF  SAMUEL. 


305 


being  a small  portable  object,  the  people  became  more 
and  more  accustomed  to  carry  it  with  them  during 
their  expeditions,  in  order  to  consult  Iahveh  at  any 
moment.  But  the  rival  power  of  the  ephod,  the  spirit 
of  prophecy,  assumed  much  greater  proportions.  It 
was  towards  the  end  of  the  period  of  the  J udges  that 
the  nabi,  without  attaining  the  importance  he  acquired 
in  the  ninth  century  b.c.,  commenced  to  show  himself 
with  that  originality  which  was  to  make  him  the  very 
axis  and  the  pivot  of  the  history  of  Israel. 

Along  with  the  nabi,  a simple  sorcerer,  who  was  con- 
sulted as  to  the  weather,  in  order  to  find  lost  property, 
and  who  was  always  approached  with  a present  or 
small  piece  of  money  in  the  hand,*  there  was  the 
nabi  who  busied  himself  with  politics,  and  who  was 
mixed  up  in  all  the  affairs  and  all  the  intrigues  of  the 
country.  The  prophets  of  old  lived  isolated,  without 
any  common  doctrine.  At  the  epoch  we  have  reached 
they  had  a discipline  and  were  formed  into  groups. 
They  even  managed  to  form  themselves  into  schools 
round  Bamah  and  Gibeah,  establishing  what  we  may 
term  seminaries,  j*  The  secrets  by  which  they  procured 
an  orgiastic  intoxication  converted  them,  as  it  were, 
into  priests  of  Cybele  ( corgb antes ).  They  paraded  the 
country  in  companies,  “in  string,”  J with  the  choirs 
of  dances  to  the  sound  of  the  tabret  and  dulcimer. 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  ix.,  v.  6 — 14. 

f First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xix.,  v.  18  ; Second  Book  of  Kings, 
ch.  vi.,  v.  1. 

J Hebei  nebiim,  a cord  of  prophets,  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.. 
v.  5.  10. 

* 


3o6  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


It  was  something  resembling  the  howling  dervishes 
and  the  khouan  of  Mussulman  countries.  They  might 
be  seen  descending  from  the  high  places  preceded 
by  pipes  and  timbrels,  and  flutes  and  harps,  singing, 
shouting,  gesticulating,  and  answering  each  other 
in  chorus.  It  was  enough  to  join  the  company  of 
the  prophets,  or  to  meet  it,  to  be  seized  with  the 
same  enthusiasm,  followed  by  prostration  and  a cata- 
leptic sleep.  During  days  and  nights  the  convulsion- 
ists  rolled  on  the  ground  entirely  naked.*  These  fits 
of  divine  fury  were  attributed  to  the  spirit  of  God, 
which  working  on  the  people  carried  them  away  and 
led  them  to  commit  acts  bordering  on  madness. j*  The 
individual  possessed  by  the  spirit  was  no  longer  respon- 
sible for  his  acts  ; he  became  another  man.  The  spirit 
acting  in  him,  he  had  nothing  to  do  but  to  let  matters 
take  their  course,  and  everything  he  did  was  supposed 
to  be  of  God.ij: 

This  new  type  of  prophet  was  essentially  the  “ man 
of  God.”  He  was  a divine  agent,  and  it  is  easy  to 
understand  the  superiority  that  this  character  gave 
him  over  the  Levite  and  the  cohen,  even  armed  with  the 
urim  and  thummim.  He  was  also  hoze  or  roe,  “ seer;”§ 
he  saw  what  others  could  not  see.  He  divined  the 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xix.,  v.  24. 
t S22nn,  “ play  the  prophet,  act  as  a prophet,  go  mad.” 
t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  6 and  following ; ch.  xix., 
v.  18  and  following. 

§ According  to  the  scolie  (or  explanation),  First  Book  of  Samuel, 
ch.  ix.,  v.  9,  the  word  nabi  was  posterior  to  roe.  This  is  very 
doubtful. 


THE  ORGANISATION  OF  SAMUEL.  307 

most  secret  thoughts.*  He  had  raptures  and  visions 
of  God.  In  this  state  he  expressed  himself  in  para- 
bolic verses,  in  lyric  stophes,  of  which  we  have  the 
type  in  the  oracles  attributed  to  Balaam. j* 

The  parallelism,  which  was  the  rhyme  of  the  He- 
brews, came  into  existence  and  produced  its  first 
miracles.  Their  charming  melody  intoxicated  the  audi- 
ence, and  the  masal , imitating  the  clashing  of  cymbals, 
seemed  to  come  from  heaven.  Primitive  man  was  much 
more  moved  than  we  are  by  harmony.  The  cadence 
worked  on  his  nerves,  creating  a kind  of  responsive 
vibration  which  in  some  cases  upset  the  whole  system. 

The  prophet  based  his  authority  on  signs , that  is  to 
say  upon  predictions  which  it  was  easy  to  verify,  the 
accomplishment  of  which  proved  the  divine  character 
of  his  inspirations.  J The  skilful  use  of  coincidences 
was  the  most  essential  part  of  the  prophet’s  art,  and 
this  was  made  all  the  easier  for  him  by  a boundless 
credulity  of  which  we  can  hardly  form  an  idea.  “How 
therefore  stand  and  see  this  great  thing  which  the  Lord 
will  do  before  your  eyes.  Is  it  not  wheat  harvest  to- 
day ? I will  call  upon  Iahveh  and  he  will  send  thunder 

and  rain ” So  Samuel  called  unto  Iahveh,  and 

Iahveh  sent  thunder  and  rain  that  day,  and  the  people 
greatly  feared  Iahveh  and  Samuel. 

This  Samuel,  who  was  the  most  celebrated  of  the 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  ix.,  v.  19 ; ch.  x.,  v.  2 and 
following. 

t Numbers,  ch.  xxiv.,  v.  8 — 4,  15  and  following. 

X First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  ix.,  v.  19  and  following  ; ch.  x., 
V.  2 and  following. 


5o 8 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


prophets  of  the  new  type,  took  a prominent  part,  if 
one  can  believe  the  history  of  the  time,  in  the  triumph 
of  Iahveh  and  the  organisation  of  Israel.  As  in  the 
case  of  Moses,  a great  allowance  must  he  made  for 
the  mania  of  antedating  ideas,  which  seems  to  be  a 
general  rule  in  religious  history.  The  life  of  Samuel 
is  known  to  us  by  little  else  than  legendary  docu- 
ments. It  appears,  however,  that  his  influence  in  the 
slow  growth  of  the  dogma  of  Israel  made  itself  felt, 
although  it  could  not  be  compared  to  that  of  the  pro- 
phets of  the  ninth  century  b.c.  He  came  from  the 
village  of  Bamah  or  Bamataim-Sophim,  near  Gibeah 
of  Benjamin.*  He  played  the  part  of  both  judge 
and  prophet.  The  cause  of  his  power  was  the  influ- 
ence which  he  exercised  over  the  assemblies  at 
Mispeh.  Each  year  he  went  the  round  of  Bethel, 
Gilgal,  and  Mispeh.  He  held  assizes  there,  and 
decided  the  affairs  of  the  country  as  if  he  were  a 
sovereign.  His  activity  was  especially  displayed  in 
Benjamin  and  the  south  of  Ephraim.  His  house  in 
Bamah  was  the  business  centre  of  those  places.  As  for 
Sichern,  Gilead,  and  the  tribes  of  the  north,  they  do  not 
appear  to  have  recognised  the  authority  of  Samuel. 

The  Philistines  continued  to  beat  Israel  in  nearly 
every  encounter.  Samuel  succeeded  in  persuading 
a portion  of  the  people  that  their  disasters  were  caused 
by  their  infidelity  to  Iahveh. f It  was  agreed  that  the 
Baals  and  the  Astaroths  should  be  put  away.  There 

* To-day,  Er-Ram,  a league ‘north  of  Jerusalem. 

t The  Song  of  Deborah. 


THE  ORGANISATION  OF  SAMUEL. 


3°9 


appears  to  have  been  a solemn  reconciliation  at  Mispeli. 
The  people  drew  water  and  poured  it  out  before 
Iabveb,  then  fasted,  and  Samuel  offered  up  sacrifices.* 
During  the  next  engagement  with  the  Philistines 
it  thundered.  The  Israelites  were  encouraged  by  this 
manifestation  of  Iahveh.  The  Philistines,  who  knew 
that  Iahveh  was  a god  of  lightning,  trembled  and  fled 
beyond  Beth  Car.  Samuel  raised  a monument  to  this 
battle  between  Mispeh  and  Shen,  and  called  it  “the 
Stone  of  Ilelp.”  It  was  near  the  spot  where  some  years 
previously  the  unfortunate  battle  of  Afeq  had  been 
fought. 

Samuel  played  a still  more  important  part  in  the 
development  of  Israel  if  it  be  true  that  he  established 
in  the  ark,  or  near  the  ark,f  the  sefer , that  is  to  say 
the  open  register,  in  which  were  inscribed  the  first 
records  of  Israel.  The  ark  in  this  case  woidd  assume 
a loftier  signification,  if  it  be  possible,  than  that  of 
having  founded  monotheism,  since  it  would  have  been 
the  cradle  of  the  Bible,  the  first  archivium  of  the  history 
of  humanity.  But  the  grounds  for  this  opinion  are 
very  slight. ij:  There  is  no  proof  that  Samuel  himself 

ever  wrote. § What  may  be  true  is  that  in  his  time 
Israel  made  a certain  progress  in  the  art  of  writing. 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  vii.  ; Judges,  cb.  xx.,  v.  21. 
t mm  \JSb,  First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  x.,  v.  25. 
t Tbe  manner  in  which  the  erection  of  Ebenezer  is  related 
(First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  vii.,  v.  12)  leads  one  to  suppose  that 
tbe  art  of  writing  was  rare. 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  x.,  v.  25,  has  little  value.  It  belongs 
to  tbe  most  feeble  part  of  tbe  history  of  Samuel.  Tbe  expression 
nDt>an  toEttfa  (First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  x.,  v.  25)  does  not 


3 io  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 


Up  to  tliat  time  writing  had  not  been  in  common 
use  either  among  the  Israelites  or  the  Canaanites. 
I say  in  common  use,  for  a distinction  is  here 
necessary.  The  question  of  the  origin  of  writing 
among  a people  is  not  so  simple  as  one  may  believe. 
It  is  one  thing  to  know  the  alphabet,  and  another 
to  use  it  consecutively  in  written  documents.  A 
people  may  have  known  writing  for  centuries  without 
having  turned  it  to  any  literary  use.  Is  there  any 
more  striking  example  than  that  of  the  Latins  and 
of  the  Italian  populations,  whose  alphabet  is  more 
ancient  than  that  of  the  Greeks,  and  yet  who  did  not 
commence  to  have  a literature  until  about  200  b.c.  ? 
This  depends  in  a great  measure  on  the  substances 
used  for  writing,  on  the  cost  of  those  substances, 
and  on  the  facilities  of  procuring  them.  People 
do  not  gossip  upon  stone  or  metal  as  they  did  when, 
papyrus  became  cheap.  The  Greeks,  before  writing 
their  great  compositions,  often  prolix,  had  an  age  of 
“ graphic  parsimony,”  during  which  they  counted 
their  letters  as  it  were,*  and  confided  all  that  was 
possible  to  memory.  The  Sidonians,  the  Canaanites, 
and  the  Israelites  were  for  centuries  acquainted  with 


indicate  a constitution  or  rule  of  royalty.  It  is  rather  a transcript 
of  the  verse,  ch.  viii.,  v.  9 and  following,  which  Samuel  is 
supposed  to  have  wished  to  preserve  so  as  to  be  able  to  show  one 
day  how  right  he  was  in  his  predictions  against  the  royalty.  The 
meaning  of  “pQn  is,  “ the  character  of  a king,  the  type  of  a 

king.”  Compare  Judges,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  12  ; ch.  xviii.,  v.  7 ; Second 
Book  of  Kings,  ch.  i.,  v.  7,  and  the  frequent  expression 

* Traite  cles  Eleens  et  des  Hereens.  Corjms  inscr.  gr.,  No.  11, 


THE  ORGANISATION  OF  SAMUEL . 311 

the  Cadmean  alphabet  without  employing  it  for  lite- 
rary or  sacred  purposes. 

It  is  certain  that  people  wrote  under  David.  Wo 
may  even  suppose  that  long  before  David  lists* * * § 
of  men,  of  objects  and  genealogies,  all  kinds  of  de- 
tails difficult  to  remember,  were  recorded  in  alpha- 
betical characters.  Poetry,  which  the  memory,  on  the 
contrary,  easily  retains,  was  not  written  until  a 
relatively  recent  epoch.  The  inscription  of  Mesa, 
the  original  stone  of  which  is  in  the  Louvre, 
is  hardly  200  years  later  than  Samuel.  Now  the 
country  of  Moab  does  not  appear  to  have  been  in 
any  way  in  advance  of  the  neighbouring  countries. 
The  movement  which  commenced  in  Israel  about 
1100  b.c.,  and  which  prepared  the  age  of  David  and 
Solomon,  was  too  deep,  too  rich  in  consequences,  to 
have  been  the  work  of  a listless  people  unable  to 
write. 

Besides,  we  do  not  learn  that  Samuel  introduced  the 
slightest  change  into  the  state  of  religious  affairs  which 
he  found  established.  Iahveh  was  no  doubt  exclusively 
his  personal  god  ; but  he  did  not  object  to  the  names  of 
Baal  and  Milik  being  made  use  of.j*  He  never  thought 
of  unity  for  a place  of  worship,  for  he  raised  an  altar 
to  Iahveh  in  his  house  of  Bamah.J  He  sacrificed  no 
matter  where  ;§  without  the  least  scruple  he  honoured 

* This  is  the  exact  meaning  of  the  word  sefer. 

t Family  of  Saul ; names  composed  of  Baal  and  Milik. 

I First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  viii.,  v.  17. 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xvi.,  v.  2 and  following. 


$ i2  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


Ialiveh  on  the  heights  of  Baal.  Saul  and  his  companions 
were  witnesses  of  this  free  worship  in  the  open  air. 
They  sought  the  seer  to  consult  him  respecting  the  loss 
of  a she-ass.*  u They  went  to  a city  where  there  was  a 
man  of  God.  As  they  went  up  the  hill  to  the  city *j" 
they  found  two  maidens  going  to  draw  water,  and  said 
to  them,  Is  the  seer  here  ? And  they  answered  them, 
He  is  ; behold,  he  is  before  you.  Make  haste  now,  for 
he  came  to-day  to  the  city,  for  there  is  a sacrifice  of 
the  people  to-day  in  the  high  place.  As  soon  as  ye 
be  come  into  the  city  ye  shall  straightway  find  him, 
before  he  go  up  to  the  high  place  to  eat ; for  the  people 
will  not  eat  until  he  come,  because  he  doth  bless  the 
sacrifice,  and  afterwards  they  eat  that  be  bidden. 
Kow  therefore  get  you  up ; for  about  this  time  ye  shall 
find  him.  They  went  up  to  the  city,  and  at  the  very 
moment  they  entered  it,  behold  Samuel,  who  came  out 
before  them  to  go  to  the  high  place.  Then  Saul  drew 
near  to  Samuel  in  the  gate  and  said,  Tell  me,  I pray 
thee,  where  the  seer’s  house  is.  And  Samuel  answered 
Saul  and  said,  I am  the  seer.  Go  up  before  me  into 

the  high  place,  for  ye  shall  eat  with  me  to  day 

And  Samuel  took  Saul  and  his  servants  and  brought 
them  into  the  parlour,  and  made  them  sit  in  the  chief- 
est  place  among  them  that  were  bidden,  which  were 

about  thirty  persons Then  they  descended  from 

the  high  place  into  the  city.”  £ 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  ix.,  v.  10  and  following. 

t No  doubt  Bamah. 

| Compare  with  the  strange  story  of  sacrifices  of  Bethel,  First 
Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  3 and  following. 


THE  ORGANISATION  OF  SAMUEL. 


3l3 


Samuel  left  the  ark  at  Kirjath-Jearim  ; his  religious 
horizon  did  not  extend  beyond  Bethel  ;*  he  appears 
to  have  taken  no  account  of  Shiloh,  whose  religious 
reign  had  nearly  expired.  We  perceive  that  Israel’s 
centre  of  gravity  descended  towards  the  south  ; at  the 
epoch  of  Samuel  it  was  in  Benjamin  at  Mispeh, 
Hamah,  and  Gibeah.  Samuel  was  cohen\  in  a general 
sense  after  the  manner  of  the  patriarchs,  not  accord- 
ing to  a special  rite.  He  certainly  was  noli , exer- 
cising authority  in  virtue  of  direct  inspiration.  Like 
all  the  nabis  he  had  to  oppose  the  superstition  of 
the  urim  and  thummim  and  the  manufacture  of  epliods 
of  plated  silver.  Without  doubt  he  was  not  free 
from  fanaticism.  If  one  of  the  stories  told  of  him 
be  true,  his  mind  was  not  without  a certain  amount 
of  flexibility;  in  it  we  see  him,  in  fact,  playing  a part 
which  is  most  honourable  because  it  is  rare  in  politics. 
According  to  this  story  Samuel  founded  in  Israel  a 
regime  against  which  he  had  the  strongest  objections, 
almost  an  antipathy ; he  sacrificed  his  own  interests 
and  those  of  his  family  to  the  will  of  the  nation  which 
he  believed  to  have  been  led  astray.  But  we  are 
about  to  see  that  this  way  of  representing  matters  is 
quite  fictitious,  and  that  it  was  due  to  the  philosophy 
of  history  which,  after  the  victory  of  the  spirit  of 
prophecy,  was  taken  by  the  most  advanced  of  the  theo- 
crats,  or,  in  other  words,  by  the  sincere  Iahvehists. 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  3. 

t Afterwards  it  was  said  that  he  had  been  nazir.  The  Chronicles 
make  a Levite  of  him. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


INSTITUTION  OF  ROYALTY. 

Royalty  became  an  absolute  necessity  for  Israel.  All 
the  Semitic  tribes  in  passing  from  a nomad  to  a 
sedentary  condition  had  adopted  this  institution. 
Israel  alone  struggled  during  two  or  three  cen- 
turies against  a fatality  which  was  unavoidable.  The 
old  patriarchal  regime , to  which  had  been  tacked  on 
the  unsatisfactory  religious  institutions  of  Gilgal,  of 
Bethel,  of  Shiloh,  of  Mispeh,  the  ark,  the  ephod,  the 
oracle  of  Iahveh,  the  nebim , the  softim , had  become 
an  impossibility.  It  placed  Israel  in  a state  of 
inferiority  as  regarded  their  neighbours,  especially 
the  Philistines,  whose  territory  was  not  a twentieth 
part  that  of  Israel,  but  whose  military  and  political 
institutions  were  far  superior.  To  all  the  objections 
raised  by  the  wise  men,  partisans  of  old  ideas,  the 
people  replied,  “Xo;  we  must  have  a king,  so  that 
we  may  be  like  other  nations,  and  that  our  king  may 
judge  us,  and  go  out  before  us  and  fight  our  battles.”* 
The  king,  or  melek , so  ardently  desired,  evidently 
because  the  condition  of  the  age  demanded  one,  is,  as 
we  perceive,  the  basileus  of  the  Greeks  of  Homer. 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  viii.,  v.  5,  6,  19,  20. 


INSTITUTION  OF  ROYALTY. 


315 


The  basileus,  as  his  name  indicates,*  marched  at  the 
head  of  his  people,  led  them  to  battle,  with  a staff  in  his 
hand  ; this  was  his  part  and  lot.  He  was  the  German 
war-lord.  Great  transformations  must  take  place  before 
a royalty  born  under  such  auspices  could  become  a kind 
of  sacrament.  At  the  period  at  which  we  have  arrived 
the  problem  was  both  profane  and  military  : Israel  was 
resolved  to  exist  as  a nation.  Each  step  that  it  took 
towards  national  unity  was  a step  towards  the  mo- 
narchy. The  work  which  Gideon,  Abimelech,  and 
Jephthah  had  attempted  in  vain  was  about  to  be 
accomplished  by  a Benjamite,  of  no  great  talent,  but 
brave  and  strong,  whom  the  necessities  of  the  time 
were  about  to  raise  above  what  his  merits  and  his 
ambition  seemed  to  warrant. 

“ So  Saul  took  the  kingdom  over  Israel,”  says  the 
most  ancient  writ  concerning  these  events,  j-  It  can- 
not be  denied,  however,  that  Samuel  played  a deci- 
sive part,  not  in  opposing  the  establishment  of  the 
monarchy,  as  the  later  versions  adopted  by  the  theo- 
cratic historians  have  it,  but  on  the  contrary  in  aiding 
it,  as  the  most  ancient  authorities  say 4 According 
to  the  Scriptures,  Samuel,  listening  to  the  voice  of 
Iahveh,  indicated  the  king  and  anointed  him.  It  is 
impossible  to  say  how  these  things  happened,  seeing 
their  great  antiquity.  Independently  of  having  been 

* Compare  Agesilaus. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  47.  The  word  *TDb  means 
to  take  like  a prey,  like  plunder. 

J First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  ix.,  x.,  xi.,  xiii. , xiv. 

Z 


3 1 6 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


designated  by  prophetic  utterance,  Saul  possessed  the 
royal  qualities  of  the  time.  In  those  simple  days, 
when  bodily  strength  was  considered  as  the  greatest  of 
gifts,  he  was  looked  upon  as  an  accomplished  person. 

He  was  a hero  of  antiquity ; a tall  and  handsome 
man,  very  brave  and  robust,  from  Gibeah  in  Benjamin. 
The  tribe  of  the  Benjamites  still  formed  the  military 
portion  of  Israel.  The  men  were  powerful,  skilful, 
and  accustomed  to  bodily  exercise.  When  Saul  stood 
among  the  Benjamites  he  was  head  and  shoulders  taller 
than  any  of  them.  Circumstances,  which  have  since 
served  as  a groundwork  for  fable,  brought  him  into  in- 
tercourse with  Samuel.*  Saul  appears  to  have  remained 
for  a long  time  among  the  prophets  dancing  and  sing- 
ingwith  them.j*  He  there  contracted  habits  of  frenzy, 
which,  after  having  been  of  service  to  him,  worked 
his  ruin.  The  men  of  Gibeah,  his  fellow-countrymen, 
seeing  him  thus  moved  by  the  spirit  of  the  Lord,  said, 
“ Is  Saul  also  among  the  prophets  ? ” and  this  became 
a proverb.  Saul  observed  a certain  amount  of  reserve 
at  first  in  his  relations  with  Samuel.  He  waited  until 
some  signal  occasion  should  point  him  out  to  the 
choice  of  the  tribes. 

This  was  not  long  in  coming.  The  city  of  Jabesh 
in  Gilead,  sorely  pressed  by  Hahash  the  Ammonite, 
sent  message  after  message  to  the  tribes  to  come  to  its 
aid.  Gibeah,  which  was  a great  military  centre,  was 

* Ramak  and  Gilead  were  only  half  a league  from  each  other. 

t See  two  accounts  difficult  to  understand : First  Book  of 
Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  10  and  following ; ch.  xix.,  v.  18  and  following. 


INSTITUTION  OF  ROYALTY. 


3>7 


thrown  into  a fever  of  excitement;  Saul  was  moved  by 
the  spirit  of  God,  and  his  anger  was  kindled  greatly, 
lie  took  a yoke  of  oxen  and  hewed  them  in  pieces 
and  sent  them  through  all  the  coasts  of  Israel  by  the 
hands  of  messengers,  saying,  Whosoever  cometh  not 
forth  after  Saul  and  after  Samuel,  so  shall  it  be  done 
unto  his  oxen.  And  the  fear  of  the  Lord  fell  on  the 
people,  and  they  came  up  with  one  consent.  The 
affair  was  promptly  executed,  and  in  the  course  of  a 
few  days  the  siege  of  Jabesli-Gilead  was  raised. 

This  was  certainly  a proof  of  the  great  progress 
accomplished  in  the  work  of  the  unification  of  Israel. 
The  sight  of  Benjamin  rising  and  dying  to  the  aid  of  a 
city  so  far  away  as  Jabcsh  was  quite  a novel  one.  The 
Benjamite  hero  who  had  brought  this  about  had  a right 
to  be  king  of  Israel.  There  were  signs  of  opposition 
which  Samuel  appears  to  have  calmed.*  The  prophet 
had  fixed  upon  Gilgal  j*  as  the  place  where  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  monarchy  was  to  be  proclaimed.  His 
wishes  were  complied  with.  At  Gilgal,  the  people 
being  assembled,  Saul  was  anointed  king  of  Israel  in 
presence  of  Iahveh.  And  the  people  made  sacri- 
fices of  peace-offerings,  and  Saul  and  all  the  men  of 
Israel  greatly  rejoiced. 

According  to  this  account,  by  far  the  most  authen- 
tic, the  monarchy  was  a good  institution.  It  was  God 
who  gave  it  to  the  people,  without  having  been 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  26,  27 ; ch.  xi.,  v.  12  and 
following. 

t Great  doubts  exist  as  to  which  Gilgal  this  was. 


3 1 3 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


asked  for  it,  as  a protection.  Everything  was  done  with 
the  connivance  of  Samuel.  Afterwards  this  event  was 
related  in  quite  another  manner.  It  was  stated  that 
Samuel,  having  grown  old,  established  his  two  sons, 
Joel  and  Abiah,  judges  over  Israel,*  hut  that  they, 
far  from  imitating  their  father,  allowed  themselves  to 
he  corrupted,  received  presents,  and  brought  justice 
into  disrepute.  Then  all  the  elders  of  Israel  went  to 
Samuel  at  Eamah  and  demanded  a king  to  reign  over 
them,  “ like  all  the  other  nations.”  Not  without 
raising  many  objections,  and  after  having  painted  in 
gloomy  colours  the  abuses  of  the  royalty,  did  Samuel 
give  an  unwilling  consent. 

These  were,  in  fact,  the  sentiments  of  the  prophets 
at  a much  more  modern  epoch.  They  were  retro- 
spectively attributed  to  Samuel.  The  men  of  God, 
the  prophets  whose  ideal  ever  was  to  return  to  the 
old  patriarchal  life,  and  who  generally  found  in  the 
monarchy  an  obstacle  to  their  utopian  ideas,  regarded 
this  transformation,  which  made  Israel  like  to  any 
other  country,  as  a sacrilege.  Ialiveh  was  the  real 
king  of  the  people  in  the  theocratic  system.  To  sub- 
stitute for  him  a profane  king  was  a piece  of  impiety, 
an  act  of  ingratitude,  an  apostasy. j*  It  was  a mark 
of  distrust ; it  was  as  much  as  to  say  to  Iahveh  that 

* According  to  the  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  viii.,  v.  1,  they  both 
judged  at  Beersheba.  This  is  hardly  probable.  I suppose  that 
the  real  text  was  *7371  fTS,  as  in  the  First  Book  of  Samuel, 

ch.  iii.,  v.  20,  in  conformity  with  the  false  idea  that  all  the  sofei 
judged  throughout  all  Israel. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  viii.,  v.  7. 


INSTITUTION  OF  ROYALTY. 


3*9 


lie  was  unable  to  defend  his  people,  and  that  it  would 
be  better  to  have  a king.  Theocracy  thus  assumed 
the  appearance  of  democracy.  The  king,  representa- 
tive of  a lay  and  profane  society,  appeared  like  a 
degradation  of  religious  society. 

This  was  assuredly  not  the  opinion  of  Samuel.  The 
satire  which  he  is  supposed  to  have  aimed  at  the 
monarchy  was  directed  against  the  reign  of  Solomon, 
which  he  could  not  have  foreseen  sixty  years  in  advance. 
But,  speaking  in  an  ideal  sense,  the  clever  and  artless 
passages  in  which  are  summed  the  policy  of  the 
Israelite  theocracy*  contain  nothing  but  truth.  The 
duality  was  already  established.  Israel  sought  after 
two  contradictory  things : it  wished  to  be  like  other 
nations  and  to  be  a nation  apart.  It  wished  to  enjoy 
at  the  same  time  a real  and  tangible  existence  and  an 
idealistic  and  impracticable  dream.  Prophetism  and 
the  monarchy,  from  their  very  existence,  were  placed  in 
opposition  to  each  other.  A lay  nation  obeying  all  the 
necessities  of  lay  nations,  and  a theocratic  democracy 
perpetually  undermining  the  bases  of  civil  order,  this 
was  the  struggle  which  in  its  development  filled  up 
the  whole  history  of  Israel,  and  stamped  it  with  so 
much  originality.  In  selecting  the  very  conscience 
of  Samuel  as  the  theatre  of  this  struggle,  the  theo- 
cratic historian  set  an  example  to  Dionysius  of  Hali- 
carnassus, who  attributes  the  most  profound  reasoning 
to  the  policy  of  Romulus. 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  viii. ; cb.  x.,  v.  17  and  following; 
ch.  xii.,  v.  1 and  following;  ch.  xv. 


320  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL 

The  institution  of  the  monarchy  in  Israel  was 
quite  a profane  affair  : there  was  no  religious  idea 
about  it.  Although  very  ancient  accounts  describe 
Saul  as  acting  in  concert  with  the  nabis,  it  seems  that 
he  had  nothing  to  do  with  colienism.  The  phial  of  oil 
which  Samuel  is  supposed  to  have  poured  on  his  head* 
is  a legend,  but  not  irreconcilable  with  the  more  trust- 
worthy evidence  which  pictures  for  us  the  monarchy 
of  Israel  owing  its  existence  to  a kind  of  champ 
cle  mai.  The  sacrifices  which  are  said  to  have  been  of- 
fered up  at  Gilgal  were  obligatory  festivities,  such  as 
were  common  on  all  solemn  occasions.  The  biblical 
writer  means,  no  doubt,  that  these  sacrifices  were 
offered  to  Iahveh.  That  may  be  the  case.  Let  me 
remark,  however,  that  Saul  was,  like  Gideon  and 
Jophthah,  an  intermittent  worshipper  of  Iahveh. 
His  sons  were  called  Jonathan,  Meribaal,  Isbaal,f 
Milkisua;|  which  proves  that  he  wavered  between 
the  words  Baal,  Milik,  Moloch,  and  Iahveh  as  signi- 
fying the  divinity.  The  fact  that  during  the  whole 
course  of  his  reign  he  found  it  impossible  to  agree 
with  the  prophets  and  the  priests,  clearly  shows  the 
lay  origin  of  his  power,  and  this  was  the  character 
which  the  monarchy  maintained  in  Israel  up  to  the 
end.  “ And  the  king  was  proclaimed  in  Israel  when 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  1 and  following,  little  agrees 
with  what  follows.  Saul  was  anointed  before  there  was  any 
question  of  a monarchy. 

t One  of  his  grandsons  was  called  Meribaal. 

| Compare  with  Fjlisha,  son  of  David. 


INSTITUTION  OF  ROYALTY. 


321 


the  heads  of  the  people  and  the  tribes  were  gathered 
together ; ” here  is  one  of  those  rare  historical 
generalities  to  be  found  in  the  old  Ilebrew  writings, 
and  the  curious  place  in  which  this  maxim*  is  to 
be  found  is  by  no  means  the  least  significant  proof  of 
the  important  constitutional  meaning  attached  to  it. 

* Deuteronomy,  ch.  xxxiii.,  v 5 : prologue  of  the  Blessing 
of  Moses,  composed  of  phrases  bearing  no  relation  to  the  maxim, 
which  they  wished  to  insert  somewhere. 


CHAPTEE  XY. 


REIGN  OF  SAUL. 

Saul  appears  to  have  reigned  twenty  years  over 
Israel.  His  legitimate  wife  was  Aliinoam,  daughter 
of  Ahimaas.  She  bore  him  four  sons,*  only  one  of 
whom  distinguished  himself.  He  had  besides  several 
concubines,  who  created  at  Gibeah  numerous  colla- 
teral branches  of  the  house  of  Saul. 

Saul  had  no  capital  properly  so  called.  He  usually 
dwelt  in  Gibeah  of  Benjamin,  the  place  of  his  birth, 
named  Gibeah  of  Saul  after  him.  He  there  led  a 
family  life,  without  any  show  or  ceremony,  the 
simple  life  of  a peasant  noble,  cultivating  his  fields 
when  he  was  not  at  war,  and  holding  aloof  from  all 
business.  His  house  was  large.  At  each  new  moon 
sacrifices  and  feasts  were  celebrated  there,  at  which 
all  the  officers  had  their  places  marked  out.  The  king 
sat  with  his  back  to  the  wall.*j*  To  execute  his  orders 
he  had  couriers, } similar  to  the  Eastern  schaousch 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  49  ; ch.  xxxi.,  v.  2 ; Second 
Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  ii.,  v.  8 ; First  Book  of  Chronicles,  ch.  viii., 
v.  33. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xx.,  v.  25. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxii.,  v.  17. 


REIGN  OF  SAUL . 


323 


of  the  present  day.  There  was  nothing  which  resem- 
bled a court.  His  proud  neighbours,  who  were  more 
or  less  his  relations,  like  Abner,  kept  him  company. 
This  was  a nobility  at  once  rustic  and  military,  a solid 
corner-stone,  such  as  we  find  at  the  base  of  durable 
monarchies.  But  the  incapacity  of  the  man  ren- 
dered everything  useless.  The  monarchy  was  founded, 
but  the  dynasty  was  not  discovered  ; the  Israelites 
had  not  yet  escaped  from  the  period  of  experi- 
ments. 

At  a more  modern  epoch  the  reign  of  Saul  was 
represented  as  having  been  perpetually  disturbed  by 
Samuel.  The  old  prophet,  who  was  supposed  to 
have  established  the  monarchy  in  spite  of  himself, 
had  endeavoured  to  recover  bit  by  bit  what  he  had 
been  obliged  to  concede.  This,  we  repeat,  is  an 
account  conceived  from  a theocratic  point  of  view  at  a 
later  age.  Nothing  in  the  really  historic  writings 
proves  that  Samuel  wished  to  injure  Saul.  What 
could  have  caused  this  opposition  ? Saul  never 
endeavoured  to  trespass  on  the  prophetic  part  played 
by  Samuel ; his  power  was  exclusively  military ; in 
religion  he  innovated  nothing.  Ilis  Iahvehism  does 
not  appear  to  have  been  very  strict,  but  was  that  of 
Samuel  more  so  ? Theocratic  eclecticism  was  very 
elastic  in  those  days.  There  were  priests  of  Iahveh 
who  called  themselves  Ahimilik,  and  it  is  a question 
whether  the  same  priest  who  called  himself  Aliiali  in 
one  place,  was  not  Ahimilik  at  another.*  Like  Samuel, 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  xiv.,  v.  3,  8 ; ch.  xxi.,  xxii. 


324  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


Saul  sacrificed  in  places  already  consecrated,* * * §  raised 
altars  of  unhewn  stone,  and  displayed  no  repugnance 
for  the  names  under  wThich  the  Almighty  was  wor- 
shipped in  the  high  places.  David  and  his  wife  Mikal, 
the  daughter  of  Saul,  had  in  their  house,  as  we  shall 
see,  carved  teraphim , which  played  the  part  of  house- 
hold gods  and  were  the  object  of  religious  worship,  j* 

The  fits  of  inspired  coryhanticism  to  which  Saul  was 
subject  had  no  more  to  do  with  Ialivehism  than  with 
any  other  form  of  worship.  These  fits  were  considered 
as  produced  by  the  spirit  of  God  blowing  whither  it 
listed.  This  was  pure  elohism.  The  brain  of  Saul 
appears  to  have  been  turned  by  these  odd  tricks 
which  seem  to  have  been  practised  in  the  schools 
of  the  prophets.  Ilis  intelligence,  which  was  subject 
to  all  the  credulity  of  the  age,  became  impaired.  He 
went  as  far  as  necromancy,  and,  as  it  appears,  became 
disgusted  with  it,  for  a law  against  necromancers  and 
sorcerers  is  attributed  to  him.J  Hardly  any  progress 
in  religion  was  made  during  his  reign.  Never  was  there 
a greater  abuse  of  urim  and  tliummim .§  The  gravest 
questions  were  decided  by  dice  with  a confidence 
showing  the  blindest  faith  in  the  adepts,  and  a really 
unheard-of  audacity  among  the  priests,  guardians  of 
the  sacred  machine. 

It  is  as  a war-lord  that  Saul  stands  out  so  promi- 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  8 — 14. 

f First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  xix.,  v.  13. 

J First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  xxviii.,  v.  3,  9. 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  3,  18,  20,  36  and  following. 


REIGN  OF  SAUL . 


325 


nently  in  the  history  of  Israel.  lie  was  powerfully 
seconded  in  this  task  by  his  son,  the  brave  and  faithful 
J onathan.  When  Saul  assumed  the  royal  title  the  situa- 
tion was  deplorable.  The  Philistines  occupied  posts  in 
the  heart  of  the  country,  at  Geba,*  for  example.  Saul 
and  Jonathan  almost  alone  were  armed.  It  seems  that 
the  conquering  Philistines  had  so  sternly  prohibited 
the  manufacture  and  even  the  repair  of  objects  of  iron 
in  Israel,  that  in  order  to  sharpen  their  agricultural 
implements  the  Israelites  were  obliged  to  apply  to  the 
Philistines. f The  military  disorganisation  produced 
by  the  exclusive  importance  of  men  like  Samuel, 
strangers  to  the  art  of  war,  was  complete.  Saul  and 
Jonathan  performed  prodigies  of  valour  and  activity 
to  improve  the  position.  Up  to  that  time  the  army  of 
Israel  had  been  merely  a militia,  commanded  during 
its  period  of  training  by  a temporary  chief.  From 
Saul’s  time  there  was  a permanent  army  ; at  all  events 
there  were  skeleton  corps,  a sar-sabci  or  commander, 
a soldier  by  profession,  and  officers  having  their  men 
in  hand.  Such  an  one  notably  was  a certain  Abner  or 
Abiner,  who  appears  to  have  been  a first-cousin  of  Saul,+ 
and  who  was  evidently  a captain  of  great  capacity. 

In  his  first  campaign  Saul  selected  Miclimash, 
Bethel,  and  Gibeah  as  his  points  of  support.  Saul 
and  Jonathan  established  themselves  firmly  in  those 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  x.,  v.  4 ; ch.  xiii.,  v.  3.  Not  to  be 
mistaken  for  Gibeah. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiii.,  v.  19  and  following. 

| Compare  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  51,  and  ch.  ix., 

v.  1. 


326  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 

regions,  and  Jonathan  beat  the  small  Philistine  garri- 
son at  Geba.  This  partial  success  led  to  an  offensive 
movement  on  the  part  of  all  the  Philistine  forces.  The 
country  was  entirely  occupied  ; the  inhabitants  had  to 
hide  themselves  in  caverns,  in  cisterns,  among  rocks, 
and  in  thickets.  A great  many  crossed  the  Jordan 
and  took  refuge  in  Gad  and  in  Gilead.  A powerful 
cavalry  and  numerous  chariots  of  war  swept  the  whole 
region  north  of  Jerusalem  over  an  area  of  many 
miles. 

This  number  was  a source  of  weakness  to  the  invaders. 
They  had  with  them  a numerous  body  of  camp  followers, 
most  of  them  Israelites,  who,  seeing  the  stand  made 
by  Saul  and  Jonathan,  made  common  cause  with  their 
former  fellow-countrymen.*  The  battle  took  place 
between  Mickmask  and  Ajalon.  The  pursuit  was 
deadly  for  the  enemy,  who  left  behind  a considerable 
amount  of  plunder.  The  Israelites,  half  starved,  took 
sheep  and  oxen  and  calves,  and  slew  them,  “ and  did 
eat  them  with  the  blood.’'  This  circumstance  terrified 
Saul.  The  fact  of  eating  flesh  that  had  not  been  bled 
was  considered  a crime,  t Saul  caused  a large  stone 
to  be  brought ; upon  this  stone  each  one  brought  his 
sheep  or  his  ox  and  slew  it  there  ; then  they  recom- 
menced their  banquet,  which  lasted  all  night.  The 
great  stone  was  considered  an  altar,  “the  first  which 
Saul  built  to  Iakvek.” 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  21.  Read  with 

Greek  translators. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  31  and  following. 


REIGN  OF  SAUL. 


327 

The  priest  of  Shiloh,  Ahiah,  the  great-grandson  of 
Eli,  followed  the  army  with  his  ephod,  which  was  con- 
sulted whenever  a difficulty  arose.  At  a given  mo- 
ment the  ephod  refused  to  answer,  and  this  indicated 
a serious  perturbation.  Ialiveh  was  no  longer  in 
communication  with  his  people.  It  was  suspected 
that  a great  crime  was  the  cause  of  this  momentary 
ill-humour  on  the  part  of  Ialiveh.  The  her  cm , that  is 
to  say  the  anathema,  carrying  death  with  it,  was  to 
be  visited  on  the  person  designated  by  Ialiveh.  The 
proceedings  were  commenced  as  usual  by  division ; 
on  one  side  stood  the  whole  army,  on  the  other  side 
Saul  and  Jonathan.  “If  the  fault  be  with  me  and 
with  Jonathan,”  said  Saul,  “ give  urim.  If  the  fault 
be  with  the  people,  give  thummim .”  It  was  urim  which 
came  out.  The  question  was  then  between  Saul  and 
and  his  son,  and  Jonathan  was  taken.  It  happened 
that  Jonathan  had,  without  knowing  it,  incurred  the 
penalty  of  death  sworn  by  his  father.  The  Israclitish 
mind  loved  these  legends,  which  illustrated  the  strict 
character  of  an  oath.  The  case  of  Jephthah  will  be 
remembered.  But  in  the  case  of  Jonathan  the  people 
protested,  and  he  was  saved. 

Heroic  accounts  were  soon  circulated  concerning 
these  wars,  in  which  individual  adventure  held  the 
first  place.  The  Philistines  were  supposed  to  possess 
in  their  ranks  many  remnants  of  the  ancient  race  of  the 
Anakims,  almost  all  from  Gath.  As  the  Israelites  were 
of  middle  height,  these  giants  astonished  and  frightened 
them.  A very  ordinary  type  of  the  military  legend  was 


32  8 HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL . 


to  bring  one  of  these  giants  and  an  Israelitish  warrior 
into  contact,  the  victory  being  naturally  gained 
by  the  latter.  At  least  four  of  these  stories  are 
known.*  The  most  modern  and  the  most  detailed  is 
that  in  which  the  youthful  David  kills  Goliath  with 
a sling ; j*  but  this  legendary  name  had  already  been 
made  use  of,  for  the  sword  of  Goliath  was  handed  to 
David  by  the  priests  of  Nob  as  a trophy  which  had 
been  long  consecrated. £ The  feeble  weapons  of  the 
Israelite,  compared  to  the  terrible  arms  of  the  enemy, 
formed  the  most  amusing  part  of  these  adventures, 
which  always  terminated  by  the  pleasant  spectacle  of 
the  foreigner  killed  in  spite  of  his  helmet  and  his 
breastplate  by  the  most  childish  means.  § 

Saul  kept  as  it  were  a school  of  war,  of  which  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin  formed  the  sinews.  The  Carian 
and  Pelasgian  bands  of  Gath  and  Ekron  found  them- 
selves opposed  to  an  organisation  capable  of  resisting 
them.  There  was  perpetual  war,  a kind  of  duel  only 
interrupted  by  the  seasons.  The  general  result  was 
favourable  to  the  Israelites ; the  Philistines  were 
driven  back  into  the  plains  on  the  coast  and  the  moun- 
tains were  almost  freed  from  their  depredations. 

The  campaigns  of  Saul  against  the  Moabites,  the 
Ammonites,  and  the  Aram  of  Soba  are  little  known. 

* Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  15 — 22  ; ch.  xxiii.,  v.  21. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  xvii. 

| First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  9.  The  words  nbsn 
n'-n  must  surely  have  been  added  by  the  last  editor. 

§ Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxiii.,  v.  21.  Story  of  Benaiah 
similar  to  that  of  David.  Opposition  of  and  rP3n- 


REIGN  OF  SAUL. 


329 


What  is  related  of  his  war  against  the  Amalekites 
and  their  king  Agag  belongs  to  modern  story,  dis- 
torted with  the  intention  of  lowering  the  monarchy  for 
the  benefit  of  the  prophets.*  It  is  certain,  however, 
that  Saul  employed  a good  deal  of  his  time  in  putting 
down  the  Bedouins  of  the  East  who  pillaged  the  peace- 
ful children  of  Israel.')* 

It  is  less  easy  to  understand  the  bitterness  dis- 
played by  Saul  against  the  Canaanites,  especially  against 
the  Gibeonites,  who  had  obtained  a charter  when  the 
country  was  conquered.  It  would  have  been  better 
policy  to  make  an  effort  for  the  assimilation  of  these 
tribes,  from  which  little  danger  was  to  be  apprehended 
seeing  their  disorganised  condition.  Saul  on  the  con- 
trary tried  to  exterminate  them,  and  in  this  circum- 
stance displayed  great  cruelty.  The  result  was  that 
his  family  afterwards  suffered  terrible  reprisals.  J 
A royalty  of  this  description  founded  on  all  the  rules 
of  history,  on  heroism,  and  the  greatest  services  ren- 
dered to  national  unity,  deserved  to  enjoy  peace  and 
tranquillity  and  to  serve  as  the  basis  of  a dynasty. 
Such  was  not  the  case.  The  reign  of  Saul,  although 
very  advantageous  for  Israel,  was  for  the  son  of  Kish 
and  for  his  family  full  of  adversity  and  trouble.  A man 
of  great  courage  and  an  excellent  soldier,  Saul  was 
not  a man  of  sagacity.  He  made  an  abuse  of  the 
ephod,  and  sought  in  the  urim  and  thummim  what  he 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xv.,  v.  1 and  following. 

f First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  xiv.,  v.  48. 

J Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxi. 


330  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


ought  to  have  sought  from  common  sense.  One 
seldom  reads  of  any  one  more  superstitious  than  him. 
The  constant  terror  of  some  unknown  and  capricious 
force  paralysed  his  judgment.  His  long  connection 
with  the  school  of  the  prophets  had  given  him  a ner- 
vous debility  which  verged  upon  epilepsy.  This 
added  to  a melancholy  temperament  and  the  responsi- 
bility of  a position  new  to  Israel,  was  the  ruin  of  poor 
Saul.  He  fell  into  a kind  of  madness,  and  it  was  said 
that  he  was  troubled  with  an  evil  spirit  from  the 
Lord.*  Bereft  of  his  senses,  he  indulged  in  the  wild- 
est gesticulations,  like  the  prophets  in  their  fits.f  He 
could  be  tranquillised  only  by  music  similar  to  that  of 
the  nabis.  More  than  all  else,  the  solemn  sounds  of  the 
harp  calmed  him.  In  his  moments  of  despondency  he 
called  for  the  cleverest  harpers  to  soothe  his  troubled 
mind.J 

Among  the  excitable  and  ambitious  people  of  the 
East  a man  has  no  right  to  commit  a fault.  There  is 
always  some  one  ready  to  take  advantage  of  it.  The 
intermittent  attacks  of  madness  from  which  Saul 
suffered  would  have  been  of  little  consequence  if  fate 
had  not  placed  at  his  side  a man  who  was  endowed 
with  all  the  talents  of  which  he  was  deficient.  The 
etymological  myth  of  Jacob,  “the  supplanter,”  often 
became  a reality  in  the  ancient  history  of  Israel. 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xvi.,  v.  14  ; ch.  xviii.,  v.  10. 

t Mnann,  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  10,  wickedly. 

| First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xvi.,  v.  14 — 23. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


david’s  eaely  life. — death  of  sattl. 

u And  there  was  sore  war  against  the  Philistines  all  the 
days  of  Saul ; and  when  Saul  saw  any  strong  man  or 
any  valiant  man,  he  took  him  unto  him.”*  These  words 
appear  to  have  been  the  opening  of  a chapter  con- 
cerning David  in  the  book  of  the  Wars  of  Ialiveh. 
They  form  the  finest  eulogy  of  Saul  and  a clear  narra- 
tive of  the  historical  part  which  he  played.  Saul  was 
the  organiser  of  the  Israelite  army,  which  up  to  his 
time  had  not  existed.  But  in  history,  as  a rule,  man 
is  punished  for  the  good  he  does  and  is  recompensed 
for  the  evil.  The  open-hearted  nature  of  Saul  was 
destined  to  bring  into  notice  the  man  who  was  to 
undermine  him,  his  family,  and  his  house.  The  fate 
of  those  who  labour  at  a work  is  often  to  see  it  pass 
into  hands  more  capable  of  causing  it  to  succeed  and 
find  what  they  had  created  completed  more  perfectly 
'by  others.  History  is  quite  the  contrary  of  virtue 
rewarded.  The  family  of  the  real  founder  of  the  force 
of  Israel  was  exterminated.  The  unscrupulous  soldier 
of  fortune  who  followed  was  the  king  “ after  God’s 
heart,”  the  supposed  ancestor  of  Jesus,  of  him  whom 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  52. 


332  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL t 


the  opinion  of  humanity  has  crowned  with  every  kind 
of  halo.  Such  was  the  justice  of  Iahveli;  the  world 
belonged  to  those  who  pleased  him. 

In  the  campaigns  against  the  Philistines,  the  theatre 
of  which  was  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Shochoh  and 
Ephes-Dammim,  in  Judah,*  a Bethlehemite  of  the 
name  of  David,  the  son  of  Jesse,  j*  commenced  to  dis- 
tinguish himself.  At  that  time  the  heroism  of  a cer- 
tain Eleazar,  the  son  of  Dodo,  the  Ahohite,  J who,  almost 
alone,  stopped  the  conquering  Philistines,  was  much 
admired.  David  was  at  his  side  the  whole  time, 
fighting  desperately.  The  reputation  of  this  youthful 
warrior  rapidly  increased.  lie  was  brave,  enterprising, 
skilful,  and,  like  the  Benjamites,  an  excellent  slinger. 
But  more  extraordinary  still  were  his  civil  and  social 
qualities.  In  the  Semitic  countries  of  the  East,  whose 
ordinary  features  are  so  stern  and  grim,  there  are 
sometimes  developed  prodigies  of  grace,  elegance, 
and  wit.  David  was  one  of  these  charmers.  Capable 
of  the  greatest  crimes  when  circumstances  required,  he 
was  also  capable  of  the  most  delicate  sentiments.  He 
knew  how  to  make  himself  popular  : no  one  could  know 
him  without  becoming  attached  to  him.§  His  type  of 

* Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxiii.,  v.  9 and  following, 
corrected  by  First  Book  of  Chronicles,  ch.  xi.,  v.  12  and  follow- 
ing ; ch.  xxvii.,  v.  4.  Compare  First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch,  xvii., 
v.  1. 

f Mem.  on  the  Noms  theophores  apocopes,  in  the  Revue  des  etudes 
juices,  October  and  December,  1882,  pp.  168,  169.  Journal  des 
savants,  1st  March,  1887. 

I Ahohwas  a subdivision  of  Benjamin. 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xvi.,  v.  21,  22. 


DA  VI D' S EARLY  LIFE—DEA TH  OF  SAUL.  333 


face  contrasted  with  the  tanned  countenances  of  his 
fellow-tribesmen.  His  complexion  was  ruddy,  hi3 
features  well-formed  and  blooming,*  his  voice  soft 
and  fluent. f Very  ancient  writings  represent  him  as 
skiMed  on  the  harp  and  an  accomplished  poet.J 

lie  appeared  to  have  been  born  to  succeed.  He 
was  the  first  man  of  Judah  who  acquired  notoriety, 
being  helped  by  the  obscure  efforts  of  those  who  pre- 
ceded him.  A circumstance  which  does  great  honour 
to  Jonathan  is  the  lively  friendship  which  he  conceived 
for  this  young  man,  till  then  unknown,  who  was  as 
brave  as  and  more  intelligent  than  himself,  and  who 
was  one  day  to  prove  so  fatal  to  his  family.  He  clothed 
him  and  armed  him,  and  the  two  young  men  swore  an 
eternal  friendship. 

David  was  soon  ordered  upon  a raid,  which  proved 
a complete  success.  He  was  much  liked  by  all  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin.  On  returning  from  an  expedition 
with  Saul  the  women  of  the  villages  through  which 
they  passed  came  out  before  the  victors  with  tim- 
brels, dancing  and  singing.  The  burden  of  their  song 
ujion  that  day  was,  u Saul  hath  slain  his  thousands 
and  David  his  ten  thousands.” 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  cb.  xvi.,  v.  12,  18. 
t Ibid. 

f Amos,  cb.  vi.,  v.  5.  Tbe  Jasher  comprised  tbe  poems 
attributed  to  him  (Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  i.,  v.  17  and 
following;  cb.  iii.,  v.  33  and  following).  Tbe  part  be  is  made  to 
play  as  harpist  to  Saul  is  legendary  ; still  more  bis  role  of  psalmist. 
All  this  reposed  on  tbe  poetic  character  which  be  gained  by  the 
Jasher. 


A A 2 


334  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

Saul  was  by  nature  jealous,  and  it  must  be  admitted 
that  it  would  have  taken  less  to  make  most  people 
jealous.  Popularity  goes  out  to  meet  some  men, 
almost  without  being  sought ; public  opinion,  as  it 
were,  takes  them  by  the  hand,  exacts  from  them  the 
commission  of  crimes  as  part  of  the  programme  which 
it  imposes  on  them.  Such  a man  was  Bonaparte ; 
such  a man  was  David.  The  culprit  in  such  cases  is 
the  crowd,  the  Lady  Macbeth,  which,  as  soon  as  it  has 
chosen  its  favourite,  intoxicates  him  with  these  magic 
words,  “Thou  shalt  be  king.”  Jonathan  himself  with 
exquisite  modesty  bowed  before  David.  The  latter  did 
not  act  outwardly  as  a pretender ; but  he  looked  upon 
himself  as  a kind  of  destined  heir,  in  the  event  of  the 
king  dying.  The  situation  between  Saul  and  David 
became  daily  more  strained. 

According  to  a version  contained  in  those  parts  of  the 
biography  of  David  which  are  not  very  trustworthy,* 
Saul  once  or  twice  tried  to  kill  him  with  his  javelin. 
What  we  know  is  that  the  unfortunate  king  was  wroth 
within  himself,  and  that  he  did  what  he  could  to  drive 
David  away.  lie  is  accused  of  having  entrusted  him 
with  perilous  missions  in  order  to  get  rid  of  him.  He 
is  said  to  have  exclaimed,  “ Let  him  die  by  the  hands 
of  the  Philistines  ! ” But  all  these  little  expeditions, 
of  which  so  many  wonderful  stories  are  told,  only  made 
David  more  popular.  The  people  doted  on  him,  and 
poor  Saul  may  well  have  pronounced  in  his  heart  the 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  xviii.,  v.  10,  11  ; ck.  xix.,  v.  8 and 
following. 


DAVID'S  EARLY  LIFE— DEATH  OF  SAUL.  335 

words  attributed  to  him,  u What  can  he  have  more  but 
the  kingdom  ? ” If  what  is  related  of  the  misunder- 
standing between  Samuel  and  Saul  possesses  any  his- 
torical truth,*  it  might  be  said  that  the  Iahvehist 
party,  discontented  with  Saul,  passed  over  to  the  side 
of  David.  We  have  not  sufficient  information  to  enable 
us  to  make  so  precise  a statement.  David,  however, 
was  what  may  well  be  called,  taking  the  difference  of 
the  time  into  account,  the  chief  of  the  clerical  party. 
The  schools  for  prophets  at  Bamah,  the  priests  of 
Iahveh  at  Nob,  conspired  openly  in  his  favour.  The 
clerical  party,  under  the  most  different  circumstances, 
has  always  the  knack  of  aggravating  its  enemies.  It 
is  easy  to  imagine  how  all  those  trivial  worries, 
aggravated  by  the  susceptibility  of  Saul,  must  have 
acted  upon  a sickly  imagination  and  over-excited 
nerves. 

Pretending  to  share  the  enthusiasm  of  the  crowd, 
but  in  reality  with  a view  to  the  ruin  of  his  rival,  by 
entrusting  him  with  dangerous  missions,  Saul  next 
gave  him  his  daughter  Mikal  j*  in  marriage.  But 
everything  goes  wrong  with  those  who  are  jealous. 
Mikal  dearly  loved  the  young  hero  and  sided  with 
him  against  her  father.  Jonathan  two  or  three  times 
turned  aside  the  homicidal  projects  of  Saul,  and 
Mikal,  having  heard  that  a plot  had  been  formed  to 
slay  her  husband,  got  him  to  escape,  and  placed 

* It  is  doubtful  if  Samuel  was  still  alive.  There  is  nothing  to 
show  positively  when  he  died. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  20,  21. 


336  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


in  his  bed  the  teraphim  of  the  house,*  covering  it 
with  cloth  and  putting  a pillow  of  goat’s  hair  for 
a bolster,  in  order  to  deceive  the  assassins.  Thus 
we  see  that  these  large  wooden  penates  entered  even 
into  the  houses  of  persons  supposed  to  he  the  most 
devoted  to  Iahvehism.  No  one  was  blamed  for  this, 
and  no  one  considered  these  graven  images  as  an 
insult  to  lab. veil,  j* 

David  was  thus  obliged  to  lead  a wandering  life, 
during  which  he  found  numerous  opportunities  for 
the  exercise  of  those  expedients  in  which  he  was  so 
skilled.  This  period  of  his  existence  was  filled  with 
adventures  which  were  turned  to  good  account  by  the 
tale-bearers.  They  loved  above  all  to  bring  into  bold 
relief  the  services  rendered  by  Jonathan  to  the  dis- 
graced man,  and  the  trials  to  which  the  fidelity  of  the 
two  friends  was  exposed.  Many  of  these  episodes 
may  have  been  written  from  the  tales  told  by  Davids 
himself,  who  probably  found  pleasure  when  he  was 
old  in  relating  certain  deeds  of  valour  which  he  alone 
could  have  known  : how,  for  example,  he  had  been 
saved  by  Mikal  his  wife  ; how  in  the  cave  of  Engeddi 
he  had  had  the  life  of  Saul  in  his  hands,  and  had 
contented  himself  with  cutting  off  the  skirt  of  his 
cloak  when  he  was  asleep ; how  he  fled  to  Achish,  the 


* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xix.,  v.  13 

t The  word  teraphim , like  all  those  signifying  the  deity,  is  used 
in  the  singular  (as  Elohim). 

+ It  is  remarkable  that  all  these  anecdotes  are  related  as  David 
would  have  wished. 


DAVID'S  EARLY  LIFE.— DEATH  OF  SAUL.  337 

king  of  Gath,  and  feigned  madness,  a piece  of  deceit 
very  common  among  Orientals. 

The  life  of  a banished  man  did  not  in  antiquity 
differ  materially  from  that  of  a brigand.  David,  with- 
out any  place  of  safety,  hid  himself  in  a cave  near 
Adullam.  His  brothers  and  several  of  his  relations 
joined  him,  and  the  cave  soon  became  a lair  for 
brigands.  “ And  every  one  that  was  in  distress,  and 
every  one  that  was  in  debt,  and  every  one  that  was 
discontented  gathered  themselves  unto  him ; and  he 
became  captain  over  them,  and  there  were  with  him 
about  four  hundred  men.”  This  was  the  nucleus  of 
the  Gibborim  or  strong  men  of  David.  These  warriors 
lived  by  plunder ; they  lived  in  that  epic  period  when 
the  hero  pillaged  the  country  which  he  was  after- 
wards to  protect. 

The  greater  portion  of  the  family  of  David  had  re- 
mained at  Bethlehem  ; they  were  in  the  power  of  Saul, 
and  David  feared  that  they  would  be  subject  to  the  most 
sanguinary  reprisals.  He  found  means  to  take  them 
into  the  land  of  Moab  and  placed  them  under  the  pro- 
tection of  the  king  of  that  country.  Then  he  returned 
to  his  cave  at  Adullam,  where  he  fortified  himself,  but 
the  prophet  Gad  persuaded  him  not  to  remain  there, 
on  the  ground  that  Adullam  was  too  near  the  country 
where  Saul  reigned  supreme.  In  the  midst  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  however,  the  authority  of  Saul  was 
hardly  recognised,  and  Gad  advised  him  to  fly  thither. 
In  fact,  David  went  and  hid  himself,  with  his  brigands, 
in  the  forest  of  Heret. 


358  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


A cruel  incident  which  occurred  soon  after  this  still 
further  embittered  the  struggle  and  led  to  all  kinds  of 
atrocities.  One  of  the  places  in  which  there  was  a 
tendency  towards  religious  centralisation  was  Nob,  to 
the  north  of  Jerusalem.  Nob  possessed  a sacred  tent, 
with  an  altar  upon  which  were  spread  the  unleavened 
loaves,  an  ephod,  a treasury  of  consecrated  vessels,  and 
above  all  a numerous  priesthood  which  took  care 
of  the  sanctuary  and  lived  there.  David,  in  a raid 
which  he  made  with  his  people  in  that  direction, 
applied  to  the  chief  priest,  called  Ahimilik,*  and  asked 
him  for  bread  for  his  men.  Ahimilik,  having  no 
ordinary  bread  to  give  him,  thought  that  he  might  set 
aside  the  rules  of  the  liturgy,  and  offered  David  and 
his  men  hallowed  loaves  which  were  before  the  altar 
if  the  young  men  have  kept  themselves  from  women.-!' 
David  then  asked  Ahimilik  if  he  had  any  arms,  and  the 
priest  answered,  u The  sword  of  Goliath  the  Philistine, 
whom  thou  slewest,  is  here  wrapped  in  a cloth  behind 
the  ephod  ; if  thou  shalt  take  that  take  it,  for  there  is 
no  other  here.”  David  said,  “ There  is  none  like  that, 
give  it  me.”  Ahimilik,  in  addition,  consulted  his 
ephod  for  David ; in  a word,  the  greatest  sympathy 
reigned  between  David  and  the  priests  of  Nob. 

* This  name,  into  which  enters  that  of  the  god  Milik,  is  a proof 
of  the  eclecticism  of  the  times.  Two  generations  afterwards  we  find 
the  same  name  in  the  same  family  (Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  viii., 
v.  17).  Our  Ahimilik  is  called  further  on  (First  Book  of  Samuel, 
ch.  xxii.,  v.  9)  son  of  Ahitoub. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxi.,  v.  1 and  following;  ch.  xxii., 
v.  9 and  following. 


BA  VID'S  EARLY  LIFE— DEATH  OF  SAUL.  339 

All  this  was  told  to  Saul  by  Doeg  the  Edomite,  a 
jealous  and  wicked  man.  The  king  sent  for  Ahimilik 
and  his  family.  Ahimilik  defended  David  with 
much  moderation.  All  was  useless : Saul  ordered 

the  priests  of  Nob  to  be  put  to  death.  His  Israelite 
r acini  refused  to  do  the  deed.  He  had  to  fall  back 
upon  Doeg  for  the  execution.  According  to  the 
legend  all  the  priests  were  slain  and  Nob  was  de- 
stroyed. A single  son  of  Ahimilik,'''"  Abiatkar, 
escaped  and  fled  after  David.  What  is  probable  is 
that  Abiathar  remained  at  Nob,  and  on  hearing  of 
the  massacre  of  his  father  and  his  brothers  went  to 
David.  He  took  the  ephod  with  him,  since  it  is 
not  probable  that  the  priests  would  have  taken  the 
sacred  image  with  them  when  they  went  to  Saul  after 
being  denounced  by  Doeg. 

The  oracle  of  Iahveh  thus  fell  into  the  hands  of 
David,  and  rendered  him  signal  service.  The  rumour 
having  spread  abroad  that  the  Philistines  had  attacked 
Keilali  and  were  pillaging  the  threshing  floors,  David 
consulted  Iahveh,  saying,  “ Shall  I go  and  smite  these 
Philistines  ? ” The  answer  was  favourable.  David 
marched,  in  spite  of  the  advice  of  his  companions,  and 
completely  succeeded.  He,  however,  committed  an 
imprudence  in  entering  a walled  city  with  a handful 
of  men.  This  is  a fault  which  the  Bedouin  brigands 
avoid,  knowing  that  they  lose  all  their  advantages  in 
the  cities.  Saul  saw  the  blunder,  and  resolved  by  a 
rapid  march  to  capture  David.  The  question  was 
* Evident  exaggeration. 


340  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


whether  the  men  of  Iveilah  would  hand  him  over  to 
Saul.  The  oracle  left  David  no  illusion  on  this  sub- 
ject. He  hastened  therefore  to  leave  Keilah  with  six 
hundred  men,  and  remained  in  a mountain  in  the 
wilderness  of  Ziph,  near  Hebron,  where  he  lived  an 
adventurous  life,  hiding  himself  in  caverns  and  strong 
places.'* 

Hebron  is  nearly  at  the  summit  of  the  mountain 
range  of  Judah,  which  runs  several  leagues  to  the 
south.  Upon  this  continuation  of  the  line  of  separa- 
tion between  the  Mediterranean  and  the  Dead  Sea 
stood,  and  still  stand,  the  towns  or  villages  of  Zip, 
Carmel,  and  Maon.j*  To  the  west  of  these  places  the 
country  is  rich  and  fertile ; hut  to  the  east,  on  the  side 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  is  the  fearful  wilderness  of  Judah.  It 
was  there  that  David  fixed  the  head-quarters  of  his 
band.  Saul  could  do  nothing  against  him.  The 
Hebronites  seemed  favourable  to  him.  To  the  south 
were  the  Jerahmelites  and  the  Kenites,  always  friendly 
to  Israel. 

Zip  and  Maon  were  the  real  centres  of  the  kingdom 
of  David.  The  difference  between  him  and  Saul  became 
every  day  more  violent.  The  power  of  Saul  was  hardly 
owned  anywhere  but  in  Benjamin.  Judah,  in  reality, 
was  for  David.  However,  the  Ziphites  betrayed  their 
guest.  They  went  to  Gibeon  and  denounced  him  to 
Saul,  who  arrived  with  a strong  force  to  seize  him. 

* See  Scenery  of  David's  Outlaw  Life,  in  Survey  of  Western 
Palestine,  special  papers,  pp.  208  and  following 

f The  names  of  these  localities  still  exist. 


DAVID'S  EARLY  LIFE— DEATH  OF  SALE.  341 

David  was  at  that  moment  in  the  desert  on  the  rock 
of  Slips,  near  Maon,  and  Saul  was  pressing  him  closely 
when  he  heard  that  the  Philistines  had  invaded  the 
land,  and  he  was  obliged  to  return.  It  was  afterwards 
thought  that  the  rock  derived  its  name  from  this  event, 
as  David  had  there  slipped  like  an  eel  between  the 
fingers  of  his  enemy. 

David,  fearing  that  Saul  after  having  defeated  the 
Philistines  would  turn  back  upon  him,  left  the  region 
of  Zip  and  descended  towards  the  Dead  Sea,  where  he 
established  himself  in  the  strongholds  above  Engeddi. 
These  mountains  seem  only  accessible  to  the  chamois. 
Saul,  however,  went  there  with  two  thousand  picked 
men  commanded  by  Abner.  According  to  a pretty 
story,  cleverly  invented  if  it  be  not  true,  David, 
hiding  in  a cave,  at  one  moment  had  his  enemy  in 
his  hand,  but  was  satisfied  with  cutting  off  the  skirt 
of  his  raiment.  According  to  another  anecdote, 
still  more  artistically  arranged  and  worthy  of  the 
romance  of  Antar , David  found  means  to  steal  from 
Saul  his  lance  and  his  pitcher  of  water,  which 
furnished  him  with  a good  opportunity  for  laughing 
at  Abner.  David,  if  one  excepts  the  consequences 
which  are  inseparable  from  brigandage,  behaved  with 
relative  moderation.  His  conduct  towards  the  Maonite 
Nabal,  a wealthy  man  who  owned  many  flocks  in  the 
neighbourhood,  is  related  as  a prodigy  of  wisdom. 
With  the  ordinary  feeling  of  a Eedouin  who  thinks 
that  he  ought  to  be  paid  for  what  he  does  not  steal, 
and  who  looks  upon  himself  as  the  protector  of  the 


342 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


people  he  does  not  plunder,  David’s  men  observed  one 
day  to  Nabal  that  not  one  of  his  sheep  was  missing, 
which  on  the  part  of  half-starved  neighbours  was  very 
meritorious.  Nabal  was  churlish ; his  wife  Abigail 
made  it  up  by  hospitality.  Nabal  died  a few  days 
afterwards,  and  David  married  Abigail.  He  also 
married  another  woman  of  those  parts,  called  Ahinoam. 
Mikal  had  not  followed  David  in  his  exile.  As  a 
woman,  according  to  the  ideas  of  those  days,  should 
never  remain  without  a husband,  her  father  had  given 
her  to  one  of  his  officers  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin. 

An  incident  in  the  wandering  life  of  David,  far 
more  difficult  to  justify,  was  his  sojourn  among  the 
most  bitter  enemies  of  his  country,  the  Philistines. 
There  can,  however,  be  no  doubt  about  it.  David 
spent  six  months,  accompanied  by  six  hundred  men 
and  his  two  wives,  with  the  son  of  the  king  of  Gath, 
Achish,  who  gave  him  Ziklag,  in  the  country  of  the 
Philistines,  which  from  that  time  belonged  to  the 
kings  of  Judah.  This  became  a complete  Israelitish 
colony.  Abiathar  with  his  ephod  represented  the 
worship  of  Iahveh  in  its  chief  functions,  which  con- 
sisted in  giving  advice  with  regard  to  the  future. 

Prom  Ziklag  David  sent  out  expeditions  which 
pillaged  and  massacred  ihe  nomad  tribes  of  the  desert 
of  Paran,  especially  the  Amalekites.  These  tribes 
were  the  friends  of  the  Philistines  and  the  enemies  of 
Israel.  David  therefore  considered  it  patriotic  to  do 
them  all  the  harm  he  could.  Fearing,  on  the  other 
hand,  that  these  massacres  would  displease  the  Phi- 


DAVID'S  EARLY  LIFE— DEATH  OF  SAUL.  343 

listines,  lie  took  the  precaution  of  killing  men,  women, 
and  children.  He  brought  back  to  Gath,  in  the  way 
of  booty,  nothing  but  the  flocks  and  goods  stolen. 
When  Achish  asked  him  against  whom  he  had  directed 
his  last  raid,  he  replied,  u On  the  side  of  the  Negeb  * 
of  Judah,”  or  u against  the  Jerhamelites,”  or  u against 
the  Kenites,”  tribes  friendly  to  Israel.  Achish  was 
delighted,  for  he  shared  the  booty,  and  said  to  himself 
that  by  such  exploits  David  rendered  himself  odious 
to  his  fellow-countrymen ; and  this  would  oblige  him 
to  remain  in  his  service  for  ever. 

The  situation  became  still  more  embarrassing  when 
Achish  informed  David  of  his  intention  to  undertake 
an  expedition  against  the  Israelites,  and  to  appoint 
him  upon  his  own  body-guard.  David  replied  in 
an  evasive  manner.  It  was  now  question  of  a real 
war  and  not  of  a simple  raid,  the  army  of  the  Philis- 
tines marching  towards  the  plain  of  Jezreel  with  the 
intention  of  establishing  itself  there  in  a durable 
manner,  as  also  at  Bethsean  and  in  the  valley  of  the 
Jordan,  f David  and  his  men  marched  in  the  rear 
with  Achish.  That  good  fortune  which  had  so  often 
stood  by  him  favoured  him  on  this  occasion,  backed 
it  is  true  by  his  own  superlative  cunning,  and  extri- 
cated him  from  this  most  dangerous  position.  The 
lords  of  the  Philistines,  very  justly  it  must  be  said, 
pointed  out  to  Achish  how  much  it  was  to  be  feared 

* Negel  means  the  south,  and  signified  the  southern  or  hot  part 
of  Judah. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  7,  10. 


344  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


that  David  would  turn  round  upon  them  in  the  battle 
and  reconcile  himself  to  his  old  master  at  the  expense 
of  his  new  allies.  Dayid  was  sent  away  and  returned 
to  Ziklag  in  three  days. 

A terrible  surprise  awaited  David  and  his  men. 
Taking  advantage  of  their  absence  the  Amalekites  had 
invaded  the  Negeb,  pillaging  equally  the  Judahites, 
the  Calebites,  and  the  Philistines.  They  had  seized 
upon  Ziklag  and  had  burned  it.  The  women  and  all 
that  was  there  had  fallen  into  their  hands,  and  they 
had  gone  into  the  desert.  Great  was  the  desolation. 
The  two  wives  of  David,  Ahinoam  and  Abigail,  were 
captives.  The  people  had  lost  their  sons  and  their 
daughters.  There  were  symptoms  of  indiscipline,  and 
there  was  a talk  of  stoning  David,  who  resolved,  after 
consulting  the  oracle,  to  go  in  pursuit  of  the  Amalek- 
ites. He  made  Abiathar  bring  forth  the  ephod,  and 
he  inquired  of  Iahveh,  “ Shall  I pursue  after  this 
troop  ? Shall  I overtake  them  ? ” And  Iahveh 
replied,  “Pursue,  for  thou  shalt  surely  overtake  them 
and  without  fail  recover  all.”  David  set  out  with  six 
hundred  men.  At  the  brook  of  Besor  two  hundred 
could  go  no  farther.  lie  continued  his  march  with 
the  four  hundred  who  remained. 

An  Egyptian,  the  slave  of  an  Amalekite,  whom  they 
found  in  the  fields  half  dead  with  hunger,  led  them 
to  the  camp  of  the  Amalekites.  They  found  them 
eating  and  drinking  and  dancing,  and  rejoicing  over 
the  great  spoil  they  had  taken  out  of  the  land  of  the 
Philistines  and  out  of  the  land  of  Judah.  David  slew 


DAVID'S  EARLY  LIFE— DEATH  OF  SAUL.  345 


the  whole  band,  save  some  young  men  who  seized 
upon  the  camels  and  fled.  The  comrades  of  David 
recovered  all  that  they  had  lost,  and  David  recovered 
his  two  wives.  They  carried  back  with  them  immense 
flocks  and  herds. 

An  idea  worthy  of  the  scamps  who  composed  the 
troop  of  David  then  occurred  to  these  victorious 
bandits;  it  was  that  the  Philistines,  the  Judahites, 
and  the  Calebites  would  come  and  reclaim  their  pro- 
perty, and  that  it  would  be  necessary  at  least  to  share 
the  plunder  with  the  stragglers  who  had  remained 
behind  at  the  brook  of  Besor.  At  the  head  of  the 
column  they  cried,  “This  is  David’s  spoil,”  to  show 
that  those  who  had  not  taken  part  in  the  expedition 
had  lost  their  rights  to  what  was  formerly  their  pro- 
perty; in  other  terms,  that  everything  had  become 
the  property  of  the  Amalekites,  and  then  that  of  the 
small  expeditionary  force.  When  they  met  the  strag- 
glers of  Besor,  the  dispute  was  sharp.  The  scamps 
who  had  taken  part  in  the  expedition  would  only 
restore  to  the  stragglers  their  wives  and  their  children. 
David  considered  that  the  former  proprietors  of  the 
stolen  goods  had  lost  all  right  to  them ; but  “ he  made 
it  a statute  and  an  ordinance,”  that  those  who  remained 
with  the  baggage  should  have  their  part  in  the  spoil, 
and  this  principle  became  an  absolute  rule  in  Israel. 

David  took  a large  share  for  himself,  out  of  which 
he  sent  handsome  presents  to  his  friends  in  Judah,  to 
the  elders  of  the  cities,  especially  to  those  of  Hebron, 
Eshtemoa,  and  Hormah.  The  Kenites  and  the  Jerah- 


346  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

melites  were  not  forgotten,  and  the  holy  city  of  Bethel 
received  its  share.  This  successful  raid  had  serious 
consequences.  Up  to  that  time  David  had  been  poor. 
The  spoil  taken  from  the  Amalekites  had  placed  great 
riches  in  his  hands.  Ambitious  as  he  was  he  saw  in 
this  wealth  merely  a way  to  increase  his  influence. 
Judah  was  soon  gained  over.  The  elders  of  the  cities 
had  all  become  his  friends.  How  was  it  possible 
not  to  recognise  that  a man  who  succeeded  so  well 
must  be,  as  his  name  indicated,  the  “favourite  of 
Iahveh  ” ? 

What  above  all  is  extraordinary  in  this  run  of  good 
fortune  is  that  his  adversaries  died  just  at  the  moment 
necessary  for  his  welfare.  Saul  and  Jonathan  disap- 
peared at  the  same  moment,  and  at  the  very  hour 
that  the  adherents  of  David  would  have  wished.  On 
hearing  of  the  bold  advance  made  by  the  Philistines  in 
the  direction  of  Jezreel,  Saul  went  from  Gibeah  with 
his  son,  and  marched  bravely  to  the  north.  The  two 
armies  met  beyond  Jezreel.  The  moral  condition  of 
Saul  was  deplorable.  The  effects  of  prolonged  reli- 
gious error  exhibited  themselves  in  a pitiful  manner. 
By  dint  of  constantly  seeking  to  discern  the  opinion 
of  Iahveh  in  the  replies  of  the  urim  and  thummim , and 
by  other  frivolous  means,  he  had  become  incapable  of 
acting  with  decision.  Samuel,  who  while  he  lived 
was  always  his  dreaded  proj)het,  had  died  at  Ramah, 
without  leaving  any  heir  to  his  spiritual  authority. 
Samuel  had  on  several  occasions  found  rivals  who 
disputed  with  him  the  feeble  mind  of  Saul ; necro- 


DA  VID'S  EARLY  LIFE. — DEA TH  OF  SA  UL.  347 

mancers,  sorcerers,  ventriloquists.  These  puerile  illu- 
sions were  in  vogue  among  simple-minded  people. 
The  hollow  and  distant  voice  of  the  ventriloquist, 
appearing  to  come  from  the  other  world,  was  considered 
as  the  voice  of  the  ref  aim,  leading  a miserable  exist- 
ence under  ground.  Like  all  simple-minded  people, 
dominated  by  vulgar  illusions,  the  Israelites  believed 
in  ghosts,  in  voices,  and  in  spirits.  They  attributed 
to  certain  persons,  especially  to  women,  the  power  of 
holding  communication  with  the  dead,  and  of  making 
them  speak.  The  nobis,  whose  art  was  often  not  much 
more  serious,  were  naturally  jealous  of  the  authors  of 
these  tricks.  Samuel  had  them  banished  by  Saul.* 
But  the  fact  of  prohibiting  chimeras  is  a proof  that 
they  are  believed  in,  and  merely  lends  them  impor- 
tance in  the  minds  of  credulous  people. 

Saul  was  with  his  army  on  the  slopes  of  Gilboa,  and 
nearly  in  the  position  formerly  occupied  by  Gideon. j* 
The  Philistines  were  encamped  opposite  to  him,  at 
Shunem,  on  the  ground  afterwards  occupied  by 
Ivleber  in  1799.  Saul  was  afraid  and  hesitated.  He 
inquired  of  Iahveh,  who  answered  him  neither  by 
dreams  nor  by  urim  nor  by  the  prophets.  Samuel 
failed  him.  Samuel  had  been  his  good  genius.  Saul 
had  been  accustomed  to  act  only  on  the  advice  of  the 
seer  of  Eamah ; deprived  of  him  he  could  no  longer 
live.  He  wished  to  see  him  again,  at  no  matter  what 
price.  It  was  then  that  the  unfortunate  king  heard  of 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxviii.,  v.  3,  9. 

t See  p.  263. 


£ B 


348  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

a witch  who  practised  her  art  not  far  from  there,  at 
Endor.  He  disguised  himself  and  went  to  Endor  with 
two  men.  The  witch  at  first  suspected  a snare.  She 
asked  Saul  whom  she  should  bring  up.  The  king 
replied,  “ Samuel.”  “ Why  hast  thou  deceived  me,” 
said  the  woman,  “ for  thou  art  Saul ? ” “Be not  afraid, 
what  sawest  thou  ? ” “I  saw  gods  ascending  out  of 
the  earth.”  “What  form  is  he  of?”  “An  old  man 
cometh  up,  and  he  is  covered  with  a mantle.” 

Saul  did  not  doubt  that  this  was  Samuel.  “Why,” 
said  the  spirit,  “ hast  thou  disquieted  me,  to  make  me 
come  up?”  “I  am  sore  distressed,”  said  Saul,  “for 
the  Philistines  make  war  on  me ; God  is  departed  from 
me  and  answereth  me  no  more,  neither  by  prophets 
nor  by  dreams  ; therefore  I have  called  thee  that  thou 
mayest  make  known  unto  me  what  I shall  do.”  This 
story  has  been  handed  down  to  us  by  the  theocratic 
narrator,  who  naturally  makes  Samuel  speak  in  a 
manner  corresponding  to  his  own  ideas  concerning  the 
downfall  of  Saul. 

Facts  agreed  only  too  well  with  these  forebodings. 
The  Philistines  gained  a complete  victory.  Three 
sons  of  Saul,  Jonathan,  Abinadab,  and  Melcliishua, 
fell.  Saul  himself  was  pierced  through  with  an  arrow, 
and  fearing  to  be  abused  by  the  enemy  called  upon 
his  armour-bearer  to  run  him  through.  The  armour- 
bearer  refused,  and  so  Saul  flung  himself  upon  his 
sword. 

The  mountains  of  Gilboa  were  strewn  with  the  dead. 
Among  the  corpses  found  by  the  conquerors  were 


DAVID'S  EARLY  LIFE.— DEATH  OF  SAUL.  349 

those  of  Saul  and  his  three  sons.  They  cut  off  their 
heads,  took  their  armour  and  set  it  up  in  the  house  of 
Astaroth,  fastening  their  bodies  to  the  wall  of  Beth- 
shan.  But  the  men  of  Jabesh- Gilead,  whom  Saul 
had  formerly  saved,  went  by  night  and  took  away  the 
bodies  and  brought  them  to  Jabesh.*  They  burned 
them  there,  and  buried  their  bones  under  a tree ; then 
they  fasted  for  seven  days.  Afterwards  David  re- 
moved the  remains  from  J abesh  to  Selah,  to  the  tomb 
of  the  family  of  the  sons  of  Kish. 

David,  who  was  at  Ziklag,  on  hearing  of  the  death 
of  Saul  and  of  Jonathan,  made  a great  display  of 
grief.  The  most  ancient  collection  of  songs  contains 
one  attributed  to  him,  on  the  death  of  the  two  heroes 
— a song  which  opened  with  a vivid  apostrophe  to  the 
mountain  which  witnessed  the  disaster  : — 

The  beauty  of  Israel  is  slain  upon  thy  high  places  ; how  are  the 
mighty  fallen. f 

***** 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxxi.  ; compare  with  First  Book 
of  Chronicles,  ch.  x.,  inferior  as  regards  text. 

t Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  i.,  v.  17  and  following. 


B B 2 


CHAPTEE  XVII. 

ISH-BOSHETH  SUCCEEDS  SAUL. — DAVID  KING  OF  HEBRON. 

In  addition  to  Jonathan  and  his  two  brothers,  killed 
in  the  battle  on  the  mountains  of  Gilboa,  Saul  had  a 
fourth  son,  named  Ish-bosheth,  upon  whom  the  party 
opposed  to  David  kept  their  eyes  fixed,  especially  as 
Jonathan  had  almost  abdicated,  openly  declaring  (as 
the  adherents  of  David  asserted)  that  on  the  death  of 
his  father  it  was  David  who  should  reign.  After  the 
battle  of  Gilboa,  Abner,  who  had  probably  passed  the 
Jordan  with  the  remains  of  the  army,*  proclaimed 
Ish-bosheth  at  Mahanaim,  in  Gilead.  Ish-bosheth 
was  recognised  by  all  Israel  with  the  exception  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah.  Then  arose  the  distinction  between 
the  words  Israel  and  Judah , j*  which  eighty  years  after- 
wards may  be  said  to  have  become,  as  it  were,  two 
hostile  standards.  Judah,  as  regards  the  nation  of  the 
Deni- Jacob,  became  a separate  unity.  The  division, 
for  a moment  suppressed  by  the  bravery  of  Saul,  re- 

* First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxxi.,  v.  7. 

t See  Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  i.,  v.  9 ; First  Book  of  Kings, 
ch.  i,  y.  85. 


DA  VJD  KING  OF  HEBRON. 


35i 


appeared ; so  little  did  unity  enter  into  the  spirit  of 
the  ancient  populations  still  mainly  engaged  in  tribal 
rivalities  and  in  contests  regarding  chiefs ! 

While  Ish-bosheth  was  being  proclaimed  beyond 
the  Jordan,  David  did  not  move  from  his  retreat  at 
Ziklag.  Though  mourning  for  Saul,  he  was  taking 
steps  to  succeed  him.  By  his  gifts  he  had  won  over 
nearly  all  the  tribe  of  J udah.  To  give  to  one  what 
has  been  stolen  from  another  is  a device  which,  so 
selfish  is  man,  nearly  always  succeeds.  Besides, 
David  had  formed  with  his  brigands  the  nucleus 
of  a solid  army.  Three  Bethlehemites,  all  three 
belonging  to  his  family,  had  become  in  his  school 
very  bold  soldiers;  they  were  Joab,  Asahel,  and 
Abishai,  all  three  sons  of  Zeruiah,  the  sister  or  sister- 
in-law  of  David.  The  brigands  of  Ziklag  determined 
on  seizing  Hebron,  the  chief  town  in  those  parts. 
David,  according  to  custom,  consulted  the  ephod  of 
Abiathar.  He  asked,  “ Shall  I go  up  into  any  of  the 
cities  of  Judah?”  Iahveh  replied,  “Go  up.”  And 
David  asked  again,  “Whither  shall  I go  up ?”  and  he 
said,  “To  Hebron.”  So  David  went  up  thither  with 
his  two  wives,  Ahinoam  and  Abigail,  and  his  band, 
and  they  encamped  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Hebron. 
The  tribe  of  Judah  joined  them,  and  David  was  unani- 
mously proclaimed  King  of  Judah  (about  1050  b.c.). 
He  was  then  thirty  years  of  age. 

Henceforwards  his  views  extended  to  the  whole  of 
Israel.  He  announced  his  election  as  King  of  Judah 
to  the  different  cities,  in  particular  to  Jabesh- Gilead, 


352  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


which  he  thanked  for  the  manner  in  which  it  had 
buried  the  ashes  of  Saul.  He  behaved  in  all  respects 
as  the  heir  and  partner  of  Saul,  making  it  plain 
that  he  had  at  heart  the  interests  of  all  Israel.* 
To  the  bravery,  the  flexibility,  the  talent,  which  he 
had  exhibited  up  to  then,  he  was  about  to  join  the 
skill  of  the  consummate  politician,  the  subtleties  of  the 
most  refined  casuist,  the  doubtful  art  of  taking  advan- 
tage of  every  crime  without  ever  directly  committing 
one. 

The  gratitude  which  he  owed  to  the  family  of  Saul 
did  not  stand  much  in  his  way.  He  contented  himself 
with  speaking  with  compunction  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  ; 
he  did  not  consider  that  he  owed  anything  to  Ish- 
bosheth.  This  latter  appears  to  have  been  a man  of 
very  limited  parts,  who  was  governed  by  Abner.  From 
Mahanaim,  Abner  took  him  to  the  country  of  Benja- 
min, where  the  house  of  Saul  was  deeply  rooted.  The 
first  encounter  between  his  adherents  and  those  of 
David  took  place  at  Gibeon.  Joab  and  Abner,  the 
chiefs  of  the  two  armies,  met  on  either  side  of  the 
reservoir,  which  is  still  visible.  They  began  by  a 
combat  of  twelve  against  twelve ; then  a battle  took 
place  which  ended  in  favour  of  David. 

The  three  sons  of  Zeruiah  performed  prodigies  of 
valour  that  day.  Asahel,  who  was  a swift  runner, 
determined  to  kill  Abner.  It  was  Abner  who  killed 
him,  but  not  without  regret,  for  he  knew  that  his 
blood  would  stand  between  him  and  Joab.  Joab  and 


* Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  ii.,  v.  5 and  following. 


DA  VID  KING  OF  HEBRON. 


355 


Abishai  pursued  Abner  in  tbe  direction  of  the  Jordan, 
but  the  Benjamites  retired  in  good  order,  and  formed 
up  again  in  battle  array  on  the  top  of  a hill.  Negotia- 
tions were  opened.  The  men  of  Abner  succeeded  in 
recrossing  the  Jordan  and  in  reaching  Mahanaim.  Joab 
and  his  army  marched  all  night,  and  came  to  Hebron. 
Asahel  was  buried  in  the  tomb  of  his  family  at  Beth- 
lehem. 

This  war  of  skirmishes  between  the  two  kingdoms 
continued  for  a long  time.  The  power  of  David  in- 
creased day  by  day,  while  that  of  Ish-bosheth  dimi- 
nished. A harem  quarrel  sowed  dissension  between 
Ish-bosheth  and  Abner.  The  latter  began  to  find  that 
there  was  much  to  say  in  favour  of  having  a single 
king  from  Dan  to  Beerslieba.  Concessions  were  made 
on  both  sides.  David  insisted  as  a preliminary  con- 
dition that  his  wife,  Mikal,  the  daughter  of  Saul, 
should  be  restored  to  him.  This  was  accorded,  in 
spite  of  the  remonstrances  of  her  new  husband.  Abner 
now  laboured  with  a will  at  the  reconciliation  of  the 
two  parties.  Nearly  all  the  generals  of  Ish-bosheth 
were  won  over.  Abner  came  to  Hebron  with  twenty 
men.  David  received  him  with  apparent  cordiality. 
Abner  took  upon  himself  the  task  of  effecting  a prompt 
pacification. 

They  had  not  taken  into  account  the  honour  of 
Joab,  absolutely  pledged  according  to  Hebrew- Arab 
ideas  to  avenge  the  death  of  Asahel.  Joab  was 
absent  from  Hebron  on  a raid  when  Abner  came.  On 
his  arrival  he  learned  that  Abner  was  leisurely 


354  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

returning  to  the  land  of  Benjamin.  He  reproached 
David  for  having  allowed  such  a man  to  escape, 
took  means  to  induce  Abner  to  return  to  Hebron, 
and  drew  him  aside  between  two  gates  and  slew 
him. 

David  protested  that  he  was  not  responsible  for  the 
death  of  Abner,  of  which  J oab  alone  was  guilty  ; and 
he  cursed  Joab  in  a most  terrible  manner,  knowing 
that  his  malediction  would  have  no  effect.  He  made 
his  people  go  into  mourning,  and  he  buried  Abner  in 
pomp  at  Hebron.  He  himself  followed  the  bier  and 
wept  aloud  on  the  tomb,  and  he  composed  an  elegy 
for  Abner  as  he  had  composed  one  for  Jonathan. 
Only  one  verse  has  been  preserved,  which  appears  to 
imply  a little  irony  : “ Died  Abner  as  a fool  dieth  ? 
Thy  hands  were  not  bound  nor  thy  feet  put  into 
fetters.  As  a man  falleth  before  wicked  men  so 
fellest  thou.”* 

David  pretended  to  be  inconsolable.  It  was  neces- 
sary to  force  him  to  take  food.  Some  persons  may 
find  it  strange  that  in  spite  of  his  despair  he  left  Joab 
unpunished.  David  made  the  remark  that  although 
he  was  king  he  had  no  great  power  and  that  these 
men  (the  sons  of  Zeruiah)  were  stronger  than  he  was, 
and  he  called  upon  Iahveh  to  chastise  them.  The 
people  believed,  or  pretended  to  believe,  in  his  sin- 
cerity, and  entirely  approved  of  his  conduct.  In 
reality,  he  reaped  the  fruit  of  the  assassination.  Ab- 
ner would  have  greatly  hampered  his  policy,  and 
* Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ck.  iii.,  v.  33  and  following. 


DA  VID  KING  OF  HEBRON. 


355 


moreover  the  death  of  that  chief  was  a severe  blow  to 
the  party  of  Ish-bosheth. 

That  unfortunate  sovereign  was  abandoned  by 
every  one  at  Malianaim.  He  was  assassinated  in  his 
bed  by  two  Benjamites,  who  carried  his  head  to 
Ilebron.  David,  as  usual,  expressed  his  indignation, 
and  ordered  that  the  hands  and  feet  of  the  assassins 
i should  be  cut  off  and  that  they  should  be  crucified 
near  the  pool  of  Hebron.  The  head  of  Ish-bosheth 
was  put  in  the  tomb  of  Abner,  nis  unstable  reign 
Had  lasted  about  two  years. 

Thanks  to  this  second  murder,  the  responsibility 
for  which  David  warmly  repudiated,  the  monarchy 
of  Israel  was  definitively  established.  The  son  of 
Jesse  had  succeeded ; his  throne  was  founded  for 
five  hundred  years.  All  the  tribes  came  to  Hebron 
and  tendered  their  submission,  saying,  u Behold,  we 
are  thy  bone  and  thy  flesh.  In  time  past,  when  Saul 
was  king,  thou  leddest  Israel  to  battle.  It  was  to 
thee  that  Iahveh  said,  Thou  shalt  feed  my  people 
Israel  and  shalt  be  a prince  over  Israel.”  The  league 
was  concluded  between  them  ; David  was  anointed 
with  oil,  and  from  that  moment  became  inviolable  and 
sacred. 

Thus  what  neither  Ephraim,  nor  Gilead,  nor 
Benjamin  had  been  able  to  do,  Judah  fully  realised. 
Hebron  became  the  capital  of  Israel,  and  David  con- 
tinued to  reside  there  for  five  years  and  a half.  His 
family  began  to  establish  themselves  there.  He  con- 
tracted alliances,  in  particular  with  Talmai,  king  of 


356  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


Geser,#  whose  daughter,  Maaka,  he  married.  Ahinoam 
gave  birth  to  his  eldest  son,  Amnon ; Abigail  gave 
birth  to  Kileab  (or  Dela"ia);'f  Maaka  gave  birth  to 
Absolom;  Haggit  gave  birth  to  Adoniah;  Abital 
gave  birth  to  Sefatiah ; Eglon  gave  birth  to  Itream. 

David  had  no  longer  any  rival.  Of  the  family  of 
Saul  there  remained  but  one  child  who  was  a cripple, 
Merribaal,^  the  son  of  Jonathan.  He  was  five  years 
old  when  the  news  of  the  death  of  Saul  and  of 
Jonathan  arrived.  The  slave  to  whom  he  had  been 
confided  fled  with  so  much  haste  that  she  allowed  him 
to  fall,  and  this  made  him  lame  in  both  legs.§  We 
shall  see  amid  what  vicissitudes  the  agitated  existence 
of  this  unfortunate  youth  was  passed. 

* No  doubt  Geser  in  the  south-west  desert.  Joshua,  ch.  xiii., 
V.  2 ; First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xxvii.,  v.  8. 

f Name  altered. 

\ Or  Mephibaal.  But  there  is  no  theophoric  name  in  Miph  or 
MipTii.  Compare  First  Book  of  Chronicles,  ch.  viii.,  v.  84.  See 
above,  p.  169. 

§ First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  iv.,  v.  4. 


CHAPTEB  XVIII. 


DAVID  KING  OF  JERUSALEM. 

Hebron  was  a Hittite  city,  the  centre  of  an  ancient 
civilisation,  which  to  some  extent  had  been  inherited 
by  the  tribe  of  Judah.*  It  was  undoubtedly  the 
capital  of  Judah,  a city  of  the  highest  religious  cha- 
racter, full  of  recollections  and  traditions.  It  could 
boast  of  fine  public  buildings,  good  water,  and  a vast 
and  well-kept  pool.  The  unification  of  Israel  had  just 
been  accomplished  there.  It  was  only  natural  that 
Hebron  should  become  the  capital  of  the  new  kingdom. 
Though  at  a considerable  distance  from  the  tribes  of 
the  north,  its  situation  was  not  an  undesirable  one. 
Paris  is  not  in  the  centre  of  France,  nor  is  Berlin  in 
the  centre  of  unified  Germany. 

It  is  not  easy  to  say  what  induced  David  to  leave 
a city  which  had  such  ancient  and  evident  claims  for 
a hamlet  like  Jebus,  which  did  not  yet  belong  to  him. 
It  is  probable  that  he  found  Hebron  too  exclusively 
Judahite.  It  was  necessary  not  to  wound  the  suscep- 
tibilities of  the  various  tribes,  more  particularly  those 
of  Benjamin.  Better  a neutral  city  without  any  past. 

* Hittites  were  still  to  be  found  in  the  time  of  David.  First 
Book  of  Samuel,  xxvi.,  v.  6. 


358  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


This,  no  doubt,  it  was  which  hindered  David  from 
dreaming  of  Bethlehem  as  the  capital  of  his  country. 
The  hill  occupied  by  the  Jebusites  was  just  on  the 
limits  of  Judah  and  of  Benjamin,  and  was  close  to 
Bethlehem. 

The  position  was  very  advantageous.  A small  spring 
within  the  walls  allowed  it  to  stand  a siege.*  A great 
capital  would  certainly  have  been  hampered  on  such 
a site ; but  great  cities  were  neither  to  the  taste  nor 
among  the  habits  of  these  tribes.  They  preferred 
citadels  easy  of  defence.  The  Jerusalem  of  the 
Jebusites  fulfilled  these  conditions.  The  Jebusites 
pretended  that  their  city  was  impregnable.  They  said 
to  David,  “ Thou  shalt  not  come  in  hither.  The  blind 
and  the  lame  will  suffice  to  defeat  thee.”  After  that 
people  were  accustomed,  by  vmy  of  fun,  to  call  the 
Jebusites  the  lame  and  the  blind.  And  it  was  a pro- 
verb at  Jerusalem,  u The  blind  and  the  lame  shall  not 
come  into  the  house.”  f 

The  Jebusite  city  was  composed  of  the  fortress  of 
Sion,  which  must  have  been  situated  where  the  mosque 
of  El  AkasaiJ:  now  stands,  and  of  a lower  town  (Ophel) 

* Now  called  the  Well  of  the  "Virgin. 

t Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  v.,  v.  8.  I read  instead  of 
Acts,  ch.  iii.,  v.  2 ; John,  ch.  ix.,  v.  1. 

\ The  true  position  of  Sion  has  bten  definitively  fixed  on  the 
eastern  hill  of  Jerusalem  by  the  works  of  Messrs.  Schick,  Guthe, 
and  Klaiber.  See  the  Zeitschrift  der  deutschen  Palastina-Verein, 
t.  iii.,  iv.,  v.  (1880,  1881,  1882).  The  pretended  Mount  Moriah 
should  be  eliminated  from  a serious  topography  of  Jerusalem.  The 
name  of  Mount  Moriah  is  symbolic,  and  it  is  by  a supposition  without 
value  that  the  author  of  the  Chronicles  ( Second  Book  of  Chronicles, 


DAVID  KING  OF  JERUSALEM. 


359 


which  runs  down  from  there  to  the  well  which  they 
called  Gihon.  David  took  the  fortress  of  Sion,  and 
gave  the  greater  portion  of  the  neighbouring  lands  to 
Joab,*  and  probably  left  the  lower  town  to  the  Jebu- 
sites.  j1  That  population,  reduced  to  an  inferior  situa- 
tion, lost  all  energy,  thanks  to  the  new  Israelitish 
influx,  and  played  no  important  part  in  the  history  of 
Jerusalem. 

David  rebuilt  the  upper  town  of  Sion,  the  citadel 
or  millo,  and  all  the  neighbouring  quarters.  This  is 
what  they  called  the  city  of  David.  The  money 
which  David  had  gained  with  his  bands  of  Adullam 
and  Ziklag  allowed  him  to  undertake  important  con- 
structions. Tyre  was  then  the  centre  of  civilisation  in 
southern  Syria.  The  arts,  especially  architecture, 
were  highly  developed  there.  This  Syrian,  or,  it  may 
rather  be  said,  this  Phoenician  art,  was  Egyptian  art 
modified  according  to  the  materials  of  the  coast  of 
Syria.  Syria  has  neither  marble  nor  granite  to  be 
compared  with  that  of  Egypt,  but  the  timber  furnished 
by  Lebanon  was  the  finest  in  the  world.  From  Tyre 
to  Jerusalem  came  a regular  army  of  architects,  stone- 
cutters, carpenters,  and  wood-carvers,  as  well  as  loads 
of  materials  such  as  Judah  did  not  produce,  especially 

ch.  iii. , v.  1)  identifies  this  imaginary  place  with  the  hill  where 
Solomon  built  a temple.  The  name  of  Moriah  is  not  mcntitned  in 
the  really  historical  books. 

* First  Book  of  Chronicles,  ch.  xi.,  v.  6,  8,  passage  of  little 
value  surely  and  in  contradiction  with  Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch. 
v.,  but  which  must  be  founded  upon  some  tradition  respecting 
Joab. 

f Judges,  ch.  i.,  v.  21  , Zechariah,  ch.  ix.  (very  old),  v.  7. 


360  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


cedar.  The  Tyrian  architects  built  David  a palace 
near  the  Millo,  in  the  upper  town  of  Sion,  near  the 
south-east  angle  of  the  present  Haram.  Art,  properly 
so  called,  had  up  to  that  time  been  unknown  in  those 
countries.  The  prestige  acquired  by  David  was 
extraordinary.  The  land  of  Canaan  had  never  enjoyed 
anything  like  so  much  splendour  and  power. 

As  for  Israel,  David  gave  it  what  it  had  quite 
lacked  up  to  that  day,  a capital.  There  will  he 
schisms  and  protests  ; it  will  take  some  time  for  this 
capital  to  he  loved  and  adopted  by  all  Israel.  But  the 
corner-stone  is  laid,  and,  as  all  the  sympathies  and 
antipathies  of  Israel  have  been  shared  by  the  whole 
world,  Jerusalem  will  one  day  be  the  beloved  capital 
of  humanity.  This  little  hill  of  Sion  will  become  the 
magnetic  pole  of  the  love  and  poetry  of  the  religious 
world.  Who  accomplished  this  ? It  was  David. 
David  in  reality  created  Jerusalem.  Out  of  an  ancient 
citadel,  which  remained  standing  as  a memorial  of  an 
inferior  order  of  things,  he  made  a capital,  feeble  at 
first,  but  which  was  soon  to  occupy  an  important 
place  in  the  history  of  humanity.  Gloriosa  dicta  sunt 
de  te,  civitas  Dei.  Bor  centuries  the  world  will  dis- 
pute the  possession  of  Jerusalem.  An  irresistible 
attraction  will  draw  thither  people  of  various  races. 
This  rocky  hill,  without  a horizon,  without  trees, 
almost  without  water,  will  cause  hearts  to  leap  with 
joy  thousands  of  miles  away.  Every  one  will  exclaim 
with  the  pious  Israelite,  u Lcetatus  sum  in  his  quce 
dicta  sunt  mihi : In  domum  Domini  ihimus .” 


DA  VID  KING  OF  JERUSALEM.  3bi 

Every  aggrandisement  on  the  part  of  Israel  was  an 
aggrandisement  on  the  part  of  Iahveh.  Iahvchism, 
up  to  that  time  so  ill  organised,  is  now  to  have  a 
metropolis  and  soon  a temple.  Not  for  another  four 
hundred  years  will  this  metropolis  become  exclusive 
among  all  other  places  of  worship  ; but  the  spot  is 
fixed  upon.  Among  so  many  other  hills  which  Iahveh 
might  have  preferred,  the  choice  is  made.*  The 
religious  battle-field  is  marked  out. 

David  was  the  unconscious  agent  of  these  great 
humanitarian  designs.  Few  people  appear  to  have 
been  less  religious  : few  of  the  adorers  of  Iahveh  had 
less  understanding  of  the  sentiment  which  was  destined 
to  uphold  Iahvchism — justice.  David  was  Iahvehist, 
as  Mesa,  that  king  of  Moab  whose  confession  is  still 
extant,  was  Camosist.  Iahveh  was  his  tutelary  deity, 
and  Iahveh  was  a god  who  caused  his  favourites  to 
prosper,  j*  Besides,  Iahveh  was  very  useful ; he  spoke 
valuable  oracles  through  the  ephod  of  Abiathar.  This 
was  all,  for  David  and  his  companions  had  no  aversion 
to  Baal David  had  no  more  idea  than  had  Gideon, 
Abimelech,  and  Jephthah  what  the  religion  of  Iahveh 
would  become  in  the  hands  of  the  great  prophets  of 
the  eighth  century. 

But  he  was  the  founder  of  Jerusalem  and  the  father 

* Psalm  Ixviii.,  v.  16  and  following. 

t First  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  xviii.,  v.  14. 

J One  of  the  sons  of  David  was  called  indifferently  Eliada  or 
Baaliada,  Second  Book  of  Samuel,  ch.  v.,  v.  16  ; First  Book  of 
Chronicles,  ch.  xiv.,  v.  7. 


362  HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 


of  a dynasty  intimately  associated  with  the  work  of 
Israel.  That  marked  him  out  as  a subject  for  future 
legends.  One  never  can  handle  with  impunity,  even 
indirectly,  those  great  problems  which  are  being 
worked  out  in  the  hidden  depths  of  humanity. 

We  shall  witness  these  transformations  century 
after  century.  We  shall  find  the  outlaw  of  Adullam 
and  of  Ziklag  assuming  little  by  little  the  airs  of  a 
saint,  becoming  the  author  of  the  Psalms,  the  sacred 
chorege  * the  type  of  the  future  Saviour.  Jesus  will 
be  called  the  Son  of  David ! The  evangelical  bio- 
graphy will  be  distorted  in  a number  of  instances,  in 
order  to  make  the  life  of  the  Messiah  reproduce  the 
features  of  that  of  David ! Pious  souls  delighting 
over  the  sentiments  so  full  of  resignation  and  tender 
melancholy  contained  in  the  finest  of  liturgical  books 
will  fancy  themselves  in  communion  with  this  bandit; 
humanity  will  believe  in  a future  state  on  the  testi- 
mony of  David,  who  never  dreamed  of  it  himself,  and 
of  the  Sibyl,  who  never  existed.  Teste  David  cum 
Sibylla  l 0 divine  comedy  ! 

[*  The  xopryyos  (chore  r/us)  among  the  Greeks  was  the  person  who 
found  money  for  spectacles. — Note  by  Translator.] 


Messrs.  Roberts  Brothers'  Publications , 


HISTORY  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  ISRAEL. 

BY  ERNEST  RENAN, 

Author  of  “Life  of  Jesus." 

VOL. 

I.  Till  the  Time  of  King  David. 

II.  From  the  Reign  of  David  up  to  the  Capture  of  Samaria. 

III.  From  the  time  of  Hezekiah  till  the  Return  from  Babylon. 

IV.  From  the  Rule  of  the  Persians  to  that  of  the  Greeks. 

V.  Period  of  Jewish  Independence  and  Judea  under  Roman  Rule. 
CWith  Index.) 

8vo.  Cloth.  Price,  $2.50  per  volume. 


Renan’s  “ History  of  Israel  ” may  be  said  to  consist  of  three  parts.  The  first 
two  volumes  contain  the  analysis  of  the  events  that  led  up  to  the  rise  of  the  prophets; 
in  the  third,  he  unfolds  his  view  of  those  prophets  ; while  the  last  two  illustrate  the 
course  of  the  prophetical  ideas,  steadily  making  their  way,  despite  constantly  recurring 
backsets,  till  their  final  triumph  in  Jesus.  Viewing  the  five  volumes  as  a whole,  their 
interest  centres  in  Renan’s  interpretation  of  Hebrew  history;  and  it  may  safely  be 
said  that  nothing  that  he  has  done  reveals  the  brilliancy  of  his  mind  and  the  greatness 
of  his  intellectual  grasp  as  does  this  monument,  which  he  was  fortunately  permitted  to 
finish  before  his  life  came  to  an  end. 

These  last  pages,  written  with  all  the  vigor  that  characterizes  his  earliest  produc- 
tions, furnish  an  admirable  means  of  forming  a fair  estimate  of  the  man  Renan  him- 
self. To  those  who  are  fond  of  denouncing  him  as  a cynic,  the  sympathy  which  his 
last  words  breathe  for  suffering  and  struggling  humanity  constitute  the  best  reply.  He 
has  often  been  called  a sceptic,  and  yet  one  may  search  far  and  wide  through  modern 
literature  for  stronger  expressions  of  true  religious  faith  than  are  to  be  found  in 
Renan’s  works.  Above  all,  the  testimony  must  be  given  to  him  which  he  most 
valued,  — that  his  whole  life  was  actuated  by  a love  of  truth  He  made  personal 
sacrifices  for  what  he  considered  to  be  the  truth.  He  investigated  fearlessly  ; and 
when  he  spoke,  the  ring  of  sincerity  in  his  utterances,  was  never  wanting,  while  the 
boldness  of  these  utterances  was  always  tempered  with  a proper  consideration  for 
those  who  held  opinions  differing  from  his.  All  this  is  applicable  in  a marked  degree 
to  the  last  work  that  issued  from  his  restless  pen. 

It  may  safely  be  predicted  that  Renan’s  latest  production  will  take  rank  as  his 
most  important  since  the  “ Life  of  Jesus  ” There  is  the  same  charming  style,  the 
same  brilliancy  of  treatment,  the  same  clear  judgment  and  delicate  touches,  the  deep 
thoughts  and  thorough  mastery  of  his  subject,  which  have  made  Renan  one  of  the 
most  fascinating  of  modern  writers. — New  York  Times. 

To  all  who  know  anything  of  M.  Renan’s  “ Life  of  Jesus  ” it  will  be  no  surprise 
that  the  same  writer  has  told  the  “ History  of  the  People  of  Israel  till  the  Time  of 
King  David  ” as  it  was  never  told  before  nor  is  ever  like  to  be  told  again.  For  but 
once  in  centuries  does  a Renan  arise,  and  to  any  other  hand  this  work  were  impossible. 
Throughout  it  is  the  perfection  of  paradox,  for,  dealing  wholly  with  what  we  are  aP 
taught  to  lisp  at  the  mother’s  knee,  it  is  more  original  than  the  wildest  romance ; more 
heterodox  than  heterodoxy,  it  is  yet  full  of  large  and  tender  reverence  for  that 
supreme  religion  that  brightens  all  time  as  it  transcends  all  creeds.  — The  Commercial 
A dvertiser. 


Sold  by  all  Booksellers.  Mailed , postpaid , on  receipt  of  price,  by  the 
Publishers , 

ROBERTS  BROTHERS,  Boston,  Mass. 


Messrs.  Roberts  Brothers'  Publications. 


The  Future  of  Science. 

By  ERNEST  RENAN. 


One  Volume.  8vo.  515  pages.  Cloth.  Price,  $2.50. 


“It  would  be  difficult  to  name  a man  of  literary  genius  comparable  in  breadth 
and  depth  of  learning,  or  fertility  and  charm  of  expression,  to  M.  Ernest  Renan. 
Certainly  in  all  France  there  is  none  like  him.  The  fact  is  just  as  plain  that  both 
in  and  out  of  France  he  has  been  persistently  misunderstood  by  certain  of  his 
readers,  and  misrepresented  by  those  who  have  not  and  will  not  read  him.  He 
has,  for  instance,  been  called  a man  without  a religion,  and  now,  as  though  in 
answer  to  this  statement,  and  by  way  of  refuting  the  commoner  charge  that  levity 
is  the  characteristic  and  habitual  frame  of  mind  in  w'hich  he  lives,  he  has  pub- 
lished a volume  entitled  ‘The  Future  of  Science’  (Boston:  Roberts  Brothers), 
wherein  he  sums  up  the  new  faith  which  with  him  has  replaced  ‘ shattered 
Catholicism.’  . . . 

“It  should  not  be  supposed  that  M.  Renan  is  here  seriously  attempting  to 
found  a new  religion,  or  even  to  formulate  a new  system  of  philosophy.  We  have 
read  the  volume  rather  as  a personal  statement  of  the  delights  of  learning  and  of 
productive  scholarship,  and  as  such  it  has  a distinct  and  rare  value.  Nowhere 
does  it  open  itself  to  a profitable  criticism  that  would  refuse  to  challenge  the 
veracity  of  the  author.”  — Philadelphia  Press. 

“ Although  Ernest  Renan  wrote  much  of  this  book  many  years  ago  (shortly 
after  he  left  the  Catholic  Church)  it  is  to-day  an  epitome  of  the  most  advanced 
modern  thought.  In  a style  so  exquisitely  simple  that  we  think  not  of  the  words 
nor  of  the  writer  but  only  of  the  thought,  he  sums  up  W'hat  science  has  done  for 
us  already.  We  are  brought  into  full  view  of  the  idols  it  has  knocked  down.  With 
clear  vision  we  can  look  back  and  see  the  long  road  up  which  the  human  race  has 
toiled  ; our  eyes,  thanks  to  science,  unclouded  by  superstition,  can  study  it  And 
how  much  man’s  position  has  altered  ! He  was  not  especially  created.  He  was 
not  foreordained  to  everlasting  punishment,  nor  elected  to  eternal  bliss.  And 
this  great  change  of  thought,  affecting  the  foundations  of  our  social,  political, 
aud  religious  being,  we  owe  to  science.  • . . 

Will  science  ever  clear  away  the  rubbish  and  show  us  a broader,  fairer  land 
than  that  which  has  encouraged  the  toilers  before  ? Renan’s  book  gives  great 
hope  of  this.  It  is  written  in  a tone  of  courage  and  cheerfulness  that  is  very  in- 
spiring. He  admits  the  danger  of  the  transition  period,  the  relaxation  of  moral 
strength  with  the  stimulus  removed.  “ Chimeras  have  succeeded  in  obtaining 
from  the  good  gorilla  an  astonishing  moral  effort ; do  away  with  the  chimeras  and 
part  of  the  factitious  energy  they  aroused  will  disappear.”  But  when  between  the 
lines  of  this  book  we  can  detect,  as  we  do,  a spirit  devout,  tender,  upr.ght,  cheer- 
ful, and  serene,  it  seems  that  the  future  state  of  pure  rationalism  which  science 
aims  to  bring  about  would  not  be  incompatible  with  human  goodness  and  happi- 
ness.” — Chicago  Tribune- 


Sold  by  all  Booksellers.  Mailed , postpaid,  by  the  pub - 
Ushers. 

ROBERTS  BROTHERS,  Boston. 


Messrs.  Roberts  Brothers'  Publications. 


LIFE  OF  JESUS. 

By  ERNEST  RENAN, 

Author  of  “History  of  the  People  of  Israel ,”  “ The 
Future  of  Science." 

From  the  twenty-third  French  edition.  With  notes.  Revised  and 
enlarged.  8vo.  Cloth.  $2.50. 

The  new  edition,  recently  published  in  this  city  by  the  enterprising  house 
of  Roberts  Brothers,  of  Ernest  Renan’s  “Life  of  Jesus,”  uniform  in  style 
with  this  great  scholar  and  writer’s  “ History  of  the  People  of  Israel,”  will 
for  all  future  time  be  the  standard  edition  in  English  of  what  is  now  “widely 
recognized  as  the  one  great  literary  monument  of  a century  of  New  Testament 
criticism.”  The  translation  has  been  newly  revised  from  the  twenty-third  and 
final  edition,  which  was  revised  and  corrected  with  the  greatest  care  by  Renan. 
The  editor  of  this  edition  is  Joseph  Henry  Allen,  of  Cambridge,  a well-known 
scholar,  who  is  eminently  fitted  for  the  important  task  which  he  has  here 
undertaken.  Mr.  Allen  has  revised  the  two  best  known  English  translations 
existing,  recasting  nearly  every  sentence,  and  scrupulously  weighing  the  whole, 
phrase  by  phrase,  with  the  original.  He  has  also  verified  every  one  of  Renan’s 
multitude  of  citations.  It  seems  to  us  that  the  entire  work  could  not  have 
been  more  perfectly  rendered  into  English.  A wonderful  change  has  taken 
place  in  the  general  Christian  world  during  the  past  thirty  years  in  its  attitude 
towards  Renan  and  his  “ Life  of  Jesus.”  He  was  for  years,  after  the  appear- 
ance of  the  earliest  editions  of  his  book,  denounced  as  an  agnostic,  an  atheist, 
and  a blasphemer  by  evangelical  Christians  who  are  ready  now  to  acknowledge 
the  wonderful  scholarship,  the  genius,  the  purity  of  motive,  the  devout  rever- 
ence of  his  work,  while  of  course  totally  disagreeing  with  Renan  in  his  rejec- 
tion of  the  supernatural  and  the  divinity  of  Jesus.  It  has  become  the  standard 
work  of  its  kind  among  theologians  ; for  the  honesty  of  purpose  and  sincerity 
of  its  author,  together  with  the  wonderful  beauty  and  devoutness  displayed 
throughout  the  entire  work,  is  freely  recognized.  No  writer  ever  treated  Jesus 
in  a more  tender  and  appreciative  spirit  than  has  Renan.  It  seems  to  us  that, 
while  the  believer  in  the  New  Testament  record  in  its  entirety  will  not  have 
his  faith  shaken  in  the  supernatural  portion,  he  will  rise  from  a reading  of  this 
book  with  a more  intense  love  for  Christ,  and  a fuller  realization  of  the  stu- 
pendous mission  which  was  involved  in  his  brief  active  life  upon  the  earth. — 
Boston  Home  Journal. 


Sold  by  all  Booksellers.  Mailed , postpaid,  on  receipt  of 
price , by  the  Publishers, 


ROBERTS  BROTHERS,  Boston. 


Messrs.  Roberts  Brothers ’ Publications. 


The  Bible  for  Learners. 


By  Dr.  H.  Oort,  Professor  of  Oriental  Languages  at  Amsterdam, 
and  Dr.  I.  Hooykaas,  Pastor  at  Rotterdam,  with  the  assistance 
of  Dr.  A.  Kuenen,  Professor  of  Theology  at  Leiden.  Trans- 
lated from  the  Dutch,  by  Rev.  P.  PI.  Wicksteed,  of  London. 
With  a Comprehensive  Index,  made  specially  for  this  edition, 
and  Maps.  3 vols.  iamo.  Cloth. 

OLD  TESTAMENT.  Vol.  I.  Patriarchs,  Moses,  Judges. — 
Vol.  II.  Kings,  and  Prophets.  $4.00. 

NEW  TESTAMENT.  Vol.  III.  The  New  Testament.  $2.00. 


“ This  work  emanates  from  the  Dutch  school  of  theologians.  Nowhere 
in  Europe,”  said  the  lamented  J.  J.  Tayler,  “has  theological  science 
assumed  a bolder  or  more  decisive  tone  than  in  Holland,  though  always 
within  the  limits  of  profound  reverence,  and  an  unenfeebled  attachment  to 
the  divine  essence  of  the  gospel.  . . . We  know  of  no  work  done  here 
which  gives  such  evidence  of  solid  scholarship  joined  to  a deep  and  strong 
religious  spirit.” 


It  is  the  Bible  story,  told  in  a 
connected  form,  with  a history  of 
the  book  and  of  the  Bible  countries 
and  peoples.  It  properly  treats  of 
the  Bible  as  the  book  of  religion, — 
not  of  one  particular  form,  but  of 
religion  itself,  — “because  the  place 
of  honor,  in  the  religious  life  of  man- 
kind and  of  each  man  in  particular, 
belongs  to  the  person  of  J esus,  and 
because  it  is  upon  Jesus  that  the 
whole  Bible  turns,.”  It  is  by  keep- 
ing in  sight  the  fact  that  the  Bible 
is  a religious  book,  and  is  meant 
to  furnish  answers  to  the  questions 
“ Who  and  what  is  God  ? ” and 
“ What  are  we  to  do  and  what  leave 
undone?” — and  is  not  nor  was 
meant  to  be  a book  of  science  or 
history,  that  the  authors  have  made 
so  valuable  a work.  — Golden  Rule. 

As  a working  manual  for  the 
Sunday-school  teacher  it  will  be 
found  of  great  value.  Notwith- 


standing its  title,  it  is  a work  for 
all,  with  or  without  Bible  learning. 
The  scholar  will  value  it  for  its  con- 
ciseness and  labor-saving  references ; 
the  general  reader  for  the  interest 
it  possesses  as  a clear  and  interest- 
ing narrative,  easily  understood,  in 
which  the  explanations,  thoughts, 
and  ideas  of  every  great  expounder 
have  a greater  or  less  place. — 
Boston  T ranscript. 

The  object  of  the  work  has  been 
to  reduce  the  narratives  of  Scripture 
to  the  understanding  of  youth  and 
the  unlearned,  with  such  additional 
information  as  will  serve  to  better 
elucidate  the  record  and  lead  the 
reader  to  value  its  contents  as  a 
guide.  Its  simplicity  of  diction  and 
the  writer’s  infusion  of  a zealous 
spirit  into  some  of  its  narratives 
will  commend  it  to  a favorable  con- 
sideration. — Chicago  Journal. 


Sold  everywhere  by  all  Booksellers.  Mailed,  post-paid, 
by  the  Publishers, 

ROBERTS  BROTHERS,  Boston. 


Messrs.  Roberts  Brothers'  Publications. 


HISTORY  OF  DOGMA. 


By  Dr.  Adolph  Harnack,  Ordinary  Professor  of  Church  History 
in  the  University,  and  Fellow  of  the  Royal  Academy  of  Science, 
Berlin.  Translated  from  the  third  German  edition  by  Neil 
Buchanan. 

Vol.  I.  8co.  Cloth.  Price,  $2.50. 

The  translation  has  been  made  under  the  supervision  of  Prof.  A.  B. 
Bruce,  of  the  Free  Church  College,  Glasgow ; and  the  translator  has  had  the 
benefit  of  the  advance  sheets  of  the  third  German  edition,  which  has  enabled 
him  to  embody  in  this  translation  Professor  Harnack’s  latest  conclusions,  which 
differ  in  a marked  degree  from  those  expressed  in  former  editions.  Professor 
Harnack  has  written  a new  preface  specially  for  this  edition.  Theological  study 
in  this  country  has  made  considerable  progress,  and  a much  greater  approach 
has  been  made  to  agreement  on  some  fundamental  principles  of  historical 
inquiry.  But  apart  altogether  from  agreement  in  opinion,  the  interest  in  the 
class  of  questions  involved  has  grown,  even  among  non-professional  readers,  to 
such  an  extent  that  many,  even  of  those  whose  theological  attitude  is  compara- 
tively conservative,  desire  to  have  it  in  their  power  to  read  in  English  works  of 
standard  value,  such  as  Harnack  on  the  “ History  of  Dogma.” 

Dr.  Harnack’s  “History  of  Dogma”  shows  mastery  of  the  sources,  originality, 
acute  discrimination,  conscientiousness,  and  courage.  It  is  a work  of  unusual  power. 
I do  not  accept  its  main  contention  without  serious  qualification ; but  I am  greatly 
indebted  to  it  for  the  wealth  of  its  learning,  its  many  original  suggestions  and  new 
points  of  view,  and  its  stimulating  earnestness  of  moral  and  religious  purpose.  No 
student  of  its  subject  can  afford  to  neglect  it.  The  translation,  so  far  as  I have  com- 
pared it,  is  accurate  and  skilful,  and  it  is  unusually  readable.  — Prof.  Egbert  C. 
Smyth. 

The  clergy  and  all  others  who  are  interested  in  theological  literature  will  find  a 
place  on  their  study  tables  or  library  shelves  for  this  valuable  work  on  the  genesis  and 
development  of  ecclesiastical  dogma,  tracing  its  history  from  the  earliest  centuries 
through  the  mediaeval  times  and  the  period  of  the  Reformation.  It  presents  a very 
comprehensive  view  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  the  Christian  faith,  the  breach  with 
Judaism,  the  antagonism  of  Roman  and  Greek  philosophy,  the  work  of  Gnosticism, 
and  the  influence  of  Neo-Platonism.  This  volume  restricts  itself  to  the  age  of  primi- 
tive Christianity,  the  time  of  the  Apostles  and  the  Fathers.  The  complete  work  will 
be  a full  history  of  the  formulated  faith  and  the  opposition  it  has  encountered,  and 
will  be  useful  to  all  classes  of  Christian  believers,  and  almost  indispensable  in  polemic 
discussions.  — Home  Journal. 


Sold  by  all  Booksellers.  Mailed,  postpaid,  on  receipt  of 
price , by  the  Publishers , 


ROBERTS  BROTHERS,  Boston. 


Dr.  Moxom' s Books. 


SECOND  EDITION.—— 

FROM  JERUSALEM  TO  NIC/EA. 

The  Church  in  the  First  Three  Centuries.  (Lowell  Lec- 
tures.) By  Philip  Stafford  Moxom,  author  of 
“ The  Aim  of  Life.”  12mo.  Cloth.  Price,  $1.50. 

CONTENTS. 

1.  The  Rise  and  Spread  of  Christianity. 

2.  The  Organization  of  the  Early  Church. 

3.  The  Apostolic  Fathers. 

4.  The  Struggle  with  Heathenism:  Persecutions. 

5.  The  Struggle  with  Heathenism:  The  Apologists. 

6.  The  Struggle  within  the  Church:  Heresies. 

7.  The  Christian  School  of  Alexandria. 

8.  The  First  Ecumenical  Council. 


The  book  is  strongly  written.  It  moves  on  from  starting  point  to  goal 
with  life  and  vigor,  everywhere  revealing  the  signs  of  broad  and  comprehensive 
study  and  of  the  firm  grasp  of  material.  It  must  rank  its  author  among  the 
men  who  have  brought  to  the  teaching  of  history  not  only  the  best  results  of 
the  scientific  method,  but  an  enthusiasm  and  power  that  make  the  past  as  real 
as  the  living  present.  — Standard , Chicago. 

In  its  picturesque  pages  are  brought  before  us  the  great  fathers  of  the 
Church,  the  fierce  struggles  and  martyrdoms  of  those  heroic  days.  — Golden 
Rule. 

The  general  reader  who  desires  a compact  yet  comprehensive  and  intelligi- 
ble view  of  this  early  period  of  Chistianity,  can  find  no  better  book  for  his 
purpose  than  this  interesting  volume.  — Christian  Work. 

Readers  of  this  book  will  gain  a pretty  thorough  general  knowledge  of  the 
rise  and  spread  of  Christianity,  the  organization  and  development  of  the  early 
church,  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  the  persecutions,  the  Apologists,  the  struggles 
with  heresies,  the  Christian  School  of  Alexandria,  and  the  First  Ecumenical 
Council.  — Chicago  Advance. 

This  is  an  entertaining  as  well  as  instructive  book  by  Philip  S.  Moxom. 
It  comprises  a series  of  lectures  on  Christianity,  delivered  by  him  under  the 
auspices  of  the  Lowell  Institute  in  Boston  last  March.  Each  lecture  illustrates 
some  particular  phase  of  the  growth  of  Christianity,  its  birth  with  the  advent 
of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  to  the  first  ecumenical' council  held  at  Nicaea,  A.  D.  325. 
The  struggles  of  the  early  Christians,  the  frightful  persecutions  to  which  they 
were  subjected  for  holding  the  belief  that  Christ  was  the  Redeemer  of  the 
world,  the  contest  with  heathenism  and  the  church,  the  story  of  the  great  dis- 
cussion which  led  to  the  formation  of  the  Nicene  creed,  viz.,  faith  in  the  trinity 
of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  are  told  with  great  power.  Mr.  Moxom’s 
book  is  one  that  will  recommend  itself  to  every  student  of  religious  history,  for 
its  depth  and  breadth  and  its  loftiness  of  style.  — San  Francisco  Bulletin. 


u Jfyj  1 V m ' j t.  UKJN  LA 

LOS  AJNGELES 


